CHICAGO AND THE OLD NORTHWEST

CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

Agents
THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS
LONDON AND EDINBURGH
THE MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA
TOKYO, OSAKA, KYOTO
KARL W. HIERSEMANN
LEIPZIG
THE BAKER & TAYLOR COMPANY
NEW YORK

MARQUETTE AT THE CHICAGO PORTAGE

From the bas relief by H. A. MacNeil

(Courtesy of the Chicago Historical Society)

CHICAGO AND THE
OLD NORTHWEST

1673-1835

A STUDY OF THE EVOLUTION OF THE
NORTHWESTERN FRONTIER, TOGETHER
WITH A HISTORY OF FORT DEARBORN

By

MILO MILTON QUAIFE, PH.D.

Professor of History in the Lewis Institute
of Technology

THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS

Copyright 1913 By
The University of Chicago
All Rights Reserved
Published October 1913
Composed and Printed By
The University of Chicago Press
Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.

PREFACE

There are many histories of Chicago in existence, yet none of them supplies the want which has induced the preparation of the present work. It has been written under the conviction that there is ample justification for a comprehensive and scholarly treatment of the beginnings of Chicago and its place in the evolution of the old Northwest. I have endeavored to produce a readable narrative without in any way trenching upon the principles of sound scholarship. To what extent, if any, I have succeeded must be for the reader to judge. I may, however, claim the negative virtue of entire freedom from the motives of commercial gain and family partisanship, which enter so largely into our local historical literature.

In preparing the work I have made as diligent a study of the sources as practicable, at the same time availing myself freely of the studies of others in the same field. With one exception acknowledgment of my obligations to the latter is made in the footnotes. The manuscript of a lecture by the late Professor Charles W. Mann on the Fort Dearborn massacre was put at my disposal. I have used it as far as it served my purpose without attempting to cite it in the footnotes.

In many places I have broken new ground and I can scarcely expect my work to be entirely free from error. I am particularly conscious of this in connection with chap, xiii on the Indian Trade, a subject to which a volume might well be devoted. In controversial matters I have written without fear or favor from any source. If in many cases my conclusions seem to differ from those of other writers, I can only say that the words of a recent historian with reference to history writing in the Middle Ages, "Recorded events were accepted without challenge, and the sanction of tradition guaranteed the reality of the occurrence," apply with almost equal force to much of the literature pertaining to early Chicago.

I desire to express my obligation for courtesies rendered, or facilities extended, to the Chicago Historical Society, the Wisconsin State Historical Society, the Detroit Public Library, the Division of Manuscripts of the Library of Congress, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and the War Department. I am indebted also for many favors to Miss Caroline McIlvaine, librarian, and Mr. Marius Dahl, record clerk, of the Chicago Historical Society; to Mr. C. M. Burton, of Detroit; to the descendants of Nathan Heald, Mr. and Mrs. Thomas McCluer and Mrs. Arthur McCluer, of O'Fallon, Mo., Mrs. Lillian Heald Richmond and Dr. and Mrs. Ottofy of St. Louis, and Mr. and Mrs. Wright Johnson, of Rutherford, N.J.; and to my wife and to my father-in-law, Rev. G. W. Goslin, for unwearied assistance in the preparation and revision of the manuscript. Finally I wish to record my deep obligation to Dr. Otto L. Schmidt, president of the Illinois State Historical Society, for much sympathetic advice and encouragement.

M. M. Quaife
Chicago
September, 1913

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER I
THE CHICAGO PORTAGE

The story of Chicago properly begins with an account of the city's natural surroundings. For while her citizens have striven worthily, during the three-quarters of a century that has passed since the birth of the modern city, to achieve greatness for her, it is none the less true that Nature has dealt kindly with Chicago, and is entitled to share with them the credit for the creation of the great metropolis of the present day. If in recent years the enterprise of man rather than the generosity of Nature has seemed chiefly responsible for the growth of Chicago, in the long period which preceded the birth of the modern city such was not the case; for whatever importance Chicago then possessed was due primarily to the natural advantages of her position.

Since this volume is to tell the story of early Chicago, concluding at the point where the life of the modern city begins, it is not my purpose to dwell upon the natural advantages which today contribute to the city's prosperity. Her central location with respect to population, surrounded by hundreds of thousands of square miles of country as fair, and supporting a population as progressive, as any on the face of the globe; her contiguity to the wheat fields of the great West; her situation in the heart of the corn belt of the United States; the wealth of coal fields and iron mines and forests poured out, as it were, at her feet; her unrivaled systems of transportation by lake and by rail; how all these factors, reinforced by the daring energy of her citizens, have combined to render Chicago the industrial heart of the nation is a matter of common knowledge. That in the days before the coming of the railroad or the settler, when for hundreds of miles in every direction the wilderness, monotonous and unbroken, stretched away, inhabited only by the wild beast and the wild Indian; when only at infrequent intervals were its forest paths or waterways traversed by the fur trader or the priest, the representatives of commerce and the Cross, the two mightiest forces of the civilization before the advance of which the wilderness was to give way; that even in this far-away period Nature made of Chicago a place of importance and of concourse, the rendezvous of parties bent on peaceful and on warlike projects, is not so commonly understood.

The importance of Chicago in this early period was primarily due to the fact of her strategic location, whether for the prosecution of war or of commerce, at the head of the Great Lakes on one of the principal highways of travel between the two greatest interior waterway systems of the continent, those of the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence and the Mississippi River. The two most important factors in the exploration and settlement of a country are the waterways and mountain systems—the one an assistance, the other an obstacle, to travel.[1] The early English colonists in America, settling first in Virginia and Massachusetts and gradually spreading out over the Atlantic coastal plain, were shut from the interior of the continent by the great wall presented by the Allegheny Mountains. The French, securing a foothold about the same time at the mouth of the St. Lawrence River, found themselves in possession of a highway which offered ready access into the interior. The importance of the rivers and streams as highways of travel in this early period is difficult to realize today. The dense forests which spread over the eastern half of the continent were penetrated only by the narrow Indian trail or the winding river. The former was passable only on foot, and even by pack animals but with difficulty.[2] The latter, however, afforded a ready highway into the interior, and the light canoe of the Indian a conveyance admirably adapted to the exigencies of river travel. By carrying it over the portages separating the headwaters of the great river systems the early voyageurs could penetrate into the heart of the continent.

[1] Farrand, Basis of American History, 23.

[2] Ibid.

Proceeding up the St. Lawrence, the French colonists early gained the Great Lakes. Their advance rested here for a time, but in the last quarter of the seventeenth century, by a great outburst of exploring activity, the upper waters of the Mississippi were gained and eagerly followed to their outlet in the Gulf of Mexico. Thus New France found a second outlet to the sea, and thus, even before the English had crossed the Alleghenies, the French had fairly encircled them, and planted themselves in the heart of the continent. From the basin of the Great Lakes to that of the Mississippi they early made use of five principal highways.[3] On each, of course, occurred a portage at the point where the transfer from the head of the one system of navigation to the other occurred. One of these five highways led from the foot of Lake Michigan by way of the Chicago River and Portage to and down the Illinois. The Chicago Portage thus constituted one of the "keys of the continent," as Hulbert, the historian of the portage paths, has so aptly termed them.[4]

[3] Winsor, Narrative and Critical History of America, IV, 224.

[4] Hulbert, Portage Paths: The Keys of the Continent.

The comparatively undeveloped state of the field of American historical research is well illustrated by the fact that despite the historical importance of the Chicago Portage, no careful study of it has ever been made. The student will seek in vain for even an adequate description of the physical characteristics of the portage. Winsor's description, a paragraph in length, is perhaps the best and most authoritative one available.[5] Yet, aside from its brevity, neither of the two sources to which he makes specific reference can be regarded as reliable authorities upon the Chicago Portage. Moll, the cartographer, notable for his credulous temperament,[6] relied for his knowledge of the Great Lakes region upon the discredited maps of Lahontan.[7] James Logan, whose description of the portage is quoted,[8] was a reputable official of Pennsylvania, but, in common with the seaboard English colonists generally, his knowledge of the geography of the interior was extremely hazy. This is sufficiently shown by the fact that he located La Salle's Fort Miami, which had stood during the brief period of its existence at the mouth of the St. Joseph River, on the Chicago.

[5] "What Herman Moll, the English cartographer, called the 'land carriage of Chekakou' is described by James Logan, in a communication which he made in 1718 to the English Board of Trade, as running from the lake three leagues up the river, then a half a league of carriage, then a mile of water, next a small carry, then two miles to the Illinois, and then one hundred and thirty leagues to the Mississippi. But descriptions varied with the seasons. It was usually called a carriage of from four to nine miles, according to the stage of the water. In dry seasons it was even farther while in wet times it might not be more than a mile; and, indeed, when the intervening lands were 'drowned,' it was quite possible to pass in a canoe amid the sedges from Lake Michigan to the Des Plaines, and so to the Illinois and the Mississippi."—Winsor, Mississippi Basin, 24. For similar descriptions see Hulbert, Portage Paths, 181; Jesuit Relations, LIX, 313-14, note 41.

[6] Winsor, Mississippi Basin, 80, 104, 111, 163.

[7] Moll's map in his Atlas Minor is simply an English copy of Lahontan's map of 1703. For the latter see Lahontan, New Voyages to North America (Thwaites ed.), I, 156.

[8] For the substance of Logan's report see the British Board of Trade report of September 8, 1721, printed in O'Callaghan, Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of New York, V, 621. This will be cited henceforth as New York Colonial Documents.

That there should be confusion and misconception in the secondary descriptions of the Chicago Portage is not surprising, in view, on the one hand, of the unusual seasonal variations in its character, and, on the other, of the dispute which very early arose concerning it. None of the other portages between the Great Lakes and the Mississippi—if indeed any in America—were subject to such changes as this one. The dispute over its character goes back to the beginning of the French exploration of this region. When Joliet returned to Canada from his famous expedition down the Mississippi in 1673, filled with enthusiasm over his discoveries, he gave out a glowing account of the country he had visited. In particular he seems to have dwelt upon the ease of communication between the Great Lakes and the Gulf of Mexico by way of the Chicago and Illinois rivers to the Mississippi. Joliet's records were lost, but both Frontenac, the governor of New France, and Father Dablon have left accounts of his verbal report.[9] Frontenac stated that a bark could go from the St. Lawrence to the Gulf of Mexico, with only a portage of half a league at Niagara. Dablon, who seems to have appreciated the situation more intelligently than Frontenac, said that a bark could go from Lake Erie to the Gulf if a canal of half a league were cut at the Chicago Portage.

[9] Winsor, Cartier to Frontenac, 246-47; Jesuit Relations, LVIII, 105.

Probably Dablon's report represents more nearly than that of Frontenac what Joliet actually said, for it seems unlikely that he would ignore utterly the existence of the portage at Chicago. Even so, however, his description of the ease of water communication between the Great Lakes and the Mississippi River was unduly optimistic. Its accuracy was sharply challenged by La Salle upon his visit to Chicago several years later. Joliet passed through Illinois but once, rather hurriedly, knowing nothing of the country aside from what he learned of it on this trip. He was ill-qualified, therefore, to describe accurately the Illinois-Chicago highway and portage; at the most he could describe only the conditions prevailing at the time of his hasty passage. La Salle, on the other hand, was operating in the Illinois country from 1679 to 1683, seeking to establish a colony with its capital at the modern Starved Rock, one hundred miles from Chicago. He was greatly interested in developing the trade of this region, and, while he looked forward ultimately to securing a southern outlet for it, for the present he must find such outlet by way of Canada. In the course of his Illinois career he passed between his colony and Canada several times, and from both necessity and self-interest became thoroughly familiar with the routes of communication which could be followed. He himself ordinarily came by the Great Lakes to the foot of Lake Michigan and thence by the St. Joseph River and portage or the Chicago to the Illinois, but he became convinced that it would not be practicable to carry on commerce between his Illinois colony and Canada through the upper lakes, and that a route by way of the Ohio River and thence to the lower lakes and Canada was more feasible.

In discussing this subject La Salle was led to take issue with Joliet as to the feasibility of navigation between Lake Michigan and the Illinois, and so to state explicitly what the hindrances were.[10] The goods brought to Chicago in barges must be transshipped here in canoes, for, despite Joliet's assertions, only canoes could navigate the Des Plaines for a distance of forty leagues. At a later time La Salle reverted to this subject, and in this connection gave the first detailed description we have of the Chicago Portage.[11] From the lake one passes by a channel formed by the junction of several small streams or gullies, and navigable about two leagues to the edge of the prairie. Beyond this at a distance of a quarter of a league to the westward is a little lake a league and a half in length, divided into two parts by a beaver dam. From this lake issues a little stream which, after twining in and out for half a league across the rushes, falls into the Chicago River, which in turn empties into the Illinois.

[10] Margry, Découvertes et établissements des Français dans l'ouest et dans le sud de l'Amérique septentrionale, II, 81-82. This collection will be cited henceforth as Margry.

[11] Margry, pp. 166 ff.

The "channel" was the main portion and south branch of the modern Chicago River. The lake has long since disappeared by reason of the artificial changes brought about by engineers; in the early period of white settlement at Chicago it was known as Mud Lake. La Salle's "Chicago River," into which Mud Lake ordinarily drained, was, of course, the modern Des Plaines.

Continuing his description of the water route by way of the Chicago and Des Plaines, La Salle pointed out that when the little lake in the prairie was full, either from great rains in summer or from the vernal floods, it discharged also into the "channel" leading to Lake Michigan, whose surface was seven feet lower than the prairie where Mud Lake lay. The Des Plaines, too, in time of spring flood, discharged a part of its waters by way of Mud Lake and the channel into Lake Michigan. La Salle granted that at this time Joliet's proposed canal of half a league across the portage would permit the passage of boats from Lake Michigan to the sea. But he denied that this would be possible in the summer, for there was then no water in the river as far down as his post of St. Louis, the modern Starved Rock, where at this season the navigation of the river began. Still other obstacles to the feasibility of Joliet's proposed canal were pointed out. The action of the waters of Lake Michigan had created a sand bank at the mouth of the Chicago River which the force of the current of the Des Plaines, when made to discharge into the lake, would be unable to clear away. Again, the possibility of a boat's stemming the spring floods of the Des Plaines, "much stronger than those of the Rhone," was doubtful. But if all other obstacles were surmounted, the canal would still have no practical value because the navigation of the Des Plaines would be possible for but fifteen or twenty days at most, in time of spring flood; while the navigation of the Great Lakes was rendered impossible by the ice until mid-April, or even later, by which time the flood on the Des Plaines had subsided and that stream had become unnavigable, even for canoes, except after some storm.

Thus there was initiated by La Salle a dispute over the character of the water communication from Lake Michigan to the Mississippi by way of the Chicago Portage which has been revived in our own day, and in the decision of which property interests to the value of hundreds of thousands of dollars are involved.[12] Of the essential correctness of La Salle's description there can be no question. Considering its early date and the many cares with which the mind of the busy explorer was burdened, it constitutes a significant testimonial to his ability and powers of observation. It may well be doubted whether any later writer has improved upon—if, indeed, any has equaled—La Salle's description of the Chicago-Des Plaines route. From its perusal may be gathered the clue to the fundamental defect in the descriptions of the Chicago Portage which modern historians have given us. Overlooking the fact that the Des Plaines River was subject to fluctuation to an unusual degree, they err in assuming that the portage ceased when the Des Plaines was reached. The portage was the carriage which must be made between the two water systems. Hulbert is quite right in saying, as he does, that none of the western portages varied more in length than did this one.[13] In fact his words possess far more significance than the writer himself attaches to them; for the length of the carriage that must be made at Chicago varied from nothing at all to fifty miles or, at times, to even twice this distance. At times there was an actual union of the waters flowing into Lake Michigan with those entering the Illinois River, permitting the uninterrupted passage of boats from the one system to the other. At other times the portage which must be made extended from the south branch of the Chicago to the mouth of the Vermilion River, some fifty miles below the mouth of the Des Plaines.

[12] The United States of America vs. The Economy Light and Power Company. The evidence taken in this case constitutes by far the most exhaustive study of the character and historical use of the Chicago Portage that has ever been made.

[13] Hulbert, Portage Paths, 181.

It is doubtless true that "truth, crushed to earth, will rise again," but the converse proposition of the poet that error dies amid its worshipers requires qualification. Certainly in the matter under discussion La Salle as early as 1683 dealt the errors of Joliet with respect to the Chicago Portage a crushing blow. Yet these self-same errors were destined to "rise again," and in the early nineteenth century it was again commonly reported that a practicable waterway from Lake Michigan to the Mississippi could be attained by the construction of a canal a few miles in length across what for convenience may be termed the short Chicago Portage, from the south branch of the Chicago River through Mud Lake to the Des Plaines. Even capable engineers threw the weight of their opinion in support of this fallacy.[14] But the young state of Illinois learned to her cost, in the hard school of experience, the truth of La Salle's observations. The canal of half a league extended in the making to a hundred miles and required for its construction years of time and the expenditure of millions of dollars.

[14] E.g., Major Stephen H. Long. For his report see the National Register, III, 103-98.

We may now consider the dispute between Joliet and La Salle over the character of the Chicago Portage in the light of the information afforded by the statements of later writers. It will follow from what has already been said that the secondary statements, whether of travelers or of gazetteers and other compendiums of information, made in the early part of the nineteenth century, must be subjected to critical examination. The only way in which this may be done is by a resort to the sources; and our conclusions concerning the Chicago-Illinois Portage and route must be based upon the testimony of those who actually used it, or were familiar with the use made of it by others. A study of these sources makes it clear that the Des Plaines River was subject to great fluctuation at different seasons, or even as between periods of drought and periods of copious rainfall, and that the length and character of the portage at any given time depended entirely upon the stage of water in the Des Plaines. During the brief period of the spring flood boats capable of carrying several tons might pass between Lake Michigan and the Des Plaines and along the latter stream without meeting with obstacles other than those incident to the high stage of the water. The extreme range of the fluctuation was many feet.[15] Its effect upon the character of the Des Plaines was to cause it to pass through all the gradations from a raging torrent to a stream with no discharge, dry except for the pools which marked its course. There were times, then, in connection with these fluctuations, when the stream might be navigable for canoes, although it would not permit the passage of boats of greater draft.

[15] Schoolcraft estimated its depth in the seasons of periodical floods at eight to ten feet (Summary Narrative of an Exploratory Expedition to the Sources of the Mississippi River, in 1820, 398). See also Marquette's description of the spring flood of 1675, in Jesuit Relations, LIX, 181.

The duration of the spring flood was put by La Salle at fifteen or twenty days. At this time the flood was heavier than that of the Rhone, and a portion of it found its way through Mud Lake and the south branch of the Chicago River into Lake Michigan. The effect of this on the portage, obvious in itself, is described in many of the sources. Marquette, who was flooded out of his winter camp on the South Branch in the latter part of March, 1675, found no difficulty, aside from the obstacles presented by the floating ice, in passing from that point down the Des Plaines.[16] He reports the water as being twelve feet higher than when he passed through here in the late summer of 1673. In 1821, in a time of high water, Ebenezer Childs passed up the Illinois and Des Plaines rivers to Chicago in a small canoe.[17] No month or date is given for this trip, but Childs expressly states that there had been heavy rains for several days before his arrival at the Des Plaines. He was unable to find any signs of a portage between the Des Plaines and the Chicago. When he had ascended the former to a point where he supposed the portage should begin he left it and taking a northeasterly course perceived, after traveling a few miles, the current of the Chicago. The whole intervening country was inundated, and not less than two feet of water existed all the way across the portage. Two years later Keating, the historian of Major Long's expedition to the source of the St. Peter's River, which passed through Chicago in early June, 1823, was informed by Lieutenant Hopson, an officer at Fort Dearborn, that he had crossed the portage with ease in a boat loaded with lead and flour.[18] Of similar purport to the testimony of Childs and Hopson is the account given by Gurdon S. Hubbard of his first ascent of the Des Plaines with the Illinois "brigade" of the American Fur Company in the spring of 1819.[19] The passage from Starved Rock up the river to Cache Island against the heavy current was difficult and exhausting. From this point, with a strong wind blowing from the southwest, sails were hoisted and the loaded boats passed rapidly up the Des Plaines and across the portage to the Chicago, "regardless of the course of the channel."

[16] Marquette's Journal, Jesuit Relations, LIX, 181.

[17] Wisconsin Hist. Colls., IV, 162-63.

[18] Keating, Expedition to the Source of St. Peter's River, ... in the Year 1823, 1, 166.

[19] Hubbard, Gurdon Saltonstall, Incidents and Events in the Life of, 60. MS in the Chicago Historical Society library. This work will be cited henceforth as Life.

With the subsidence of the spring flood the Des Plaines fell to so low a stage as to become unnavigable, even by the small boats ordinarily employed by the fur traders and travelers, except at such times as the river was raised by rains. According to La Salle, it was "not even navigable for canoes" except after the spring flood, and it would be easier to transport goods from Lake Michigan to Fort St. Louis by land with horses, than by the use of boats on the river.[20]

[20] Margry, II, 168.

This statement of La Salle is corroborated by many other observers. St. Cosme's party of Seminary priests which passed from Chicago down the Illinois in the early part of November, 1698,[21] was compelled to portage eight leagues or more[22] along the Des Plaines, in addition to the three leagues across from the Chicago to that stream, and almost two weeks were consumed in passing from Chicago to the mouth of the Des Plaines, a distance of about fifty miles.[23] In describing the journey St. Cosme states that from Isle la Cache to Monjolly, a space of seven leagues, "you must always make a portage, there being no water in the river."

[21] Shea, Early Voyages Up and Down the Mississippi, 45 ff.

[22] The distances given in St. Cosme's detailed account total this amount. La Source's general statement is that the party portaged fifteen leagues (ibid., 83), but this, apparently, included the distance between the Chicago River and the Des Plaines.

[23] The party left Chicago October 29, and reached the mouth of the Des Plaines November 11.

In September, 1721, Father Charlevoix, touring America for the purpose of reporting to his king the condition of New France, came to the post of St. Joseph. His ultimate destination was lower Louisiana; from St. Joseph to the Illinois River proper two alternative routes were presented for his consideration, the one by way of the St. Joseph Portage and down the Kankakee River, the other around the southern end of Lake Michigan to Chicago and thence down the Des Plaines. His first intention was to follow the latter, but this was abandoned in favor of the route by the Kankakee, partly because of a storm on Lake Michigan, but also for the additional reason that since the upper Illinois, the modern Des Plaines, was a mere brook, he was told it did not have, at this season, water enough to float a canoe.[24] In his passage down the Kankakee the traveler observed at the mouth of the Des Plaines a buffalo crossing the stream. Although sixty leagues from its source, Charlevoix noted that the Des Plaines was still so shallow that the water did not rise above the middle of the animal's legs.[25]

[24] Charlevoix, Histoire et description génerale de la Nouvelle France, avec le journal historique d'un voyage fait par ordre du roi dans l'Amérique septentrionale, VI, 104.

[25] op. cit., 118.

A hundred years after Charlevoix's passage down the Illinois, in midsummer, 1821, Governor Cass and Henry R. Schoolcraft came up that stream in a large canoe en route for Chicago. The observant Schoolcraft has left a careful and detailed narrative of their experiences, and a description of the Illinois River as continued in the Des Plaines.[26] The party was compelled to abandon the canoe at Starved Rock, and the remainder of the journey to Chicago was made on horseback. The route taken was in general along the banks of the river, although the actual channel was observed only occasionally. The result of this observation was the conclusion that the "long and formidable rapids" seen by the travelers completely intercepted navigation at this sultry season. This conclusion was further confirmed by meeting several traders on the plains who were transporting their goods and boats in carts from the Chicago River. They thought it practicable to enter the Des Plaines at Mount Joliet, thus necessitating a portage of about thirty miles, but Schoolcraft in recording this opinion points out that his own party had experienced difficulties far below this point. Although himself an enthusiast on the subject of the future commercial importance of Chicago, and of the utility of a canal connecting the Chicago and Illinois rivers, Schoolcraft's experience on this journey led him to call attention to the error of those who supposed a canal of only eight or ten miles in length would be sufficient to provide a navigable highway between Lake Michigan and the Illinois. This opinion was approved by Thomas Tousey of Virginia, another enthusiast on the subject of the canal, who explored the route of the Des Plaines on horseback in the autumn of 1822.[27] Although the water was uncommonly high for the season, Tousey's investigation, while imbuing him with a "more exalted" opinion of the country and the proposed canal communication, convinced him that it would be attended with greater expense to open than he had formerly supposed.

[26] Schoolcraft, Travels in the Central Portions of the Mississippi Valley, 313 ff.

[27] Schoolcraft, Personal Memoirs of a Residence of Thirty Years with the Indian Tribes on the American Frontiers, 179-80.

The conditions encountered by John Tanner in a journey from Chicago down the Illinois River in the year 1820[28] were similar to those described by Schoolcraft the following year. Tanner was traveling from Mackinac to St. Louis in a birch-bark canoe. Some Indians who were accompanying him turned back before reaching Chicago, on receiving from others whom they met discouraging accounts of the stage of the water in the Illinois. Tanner, however, persevered in his enterprise. After a period of illness at Chicago he engaged a Frenchman, who had just returned from hauling some boats across the portage, to take him across also. The Frenchman agreed to transport Tanner sixty miles, and if his horses, which were much worn from the previous long journey, could hold out, one hundred and twenty miles, the length of the portage at the present stage of water. With his canoe in the Frenchman's cart and Tanner himself riding a horse belonging to the latter, the overland journey began. Before the first sixty-mile stage had been completed the Frenchman became ill. He turned back, therefore, and Tanner and his one companion attempted to put their canoe in the water and continue their journey. The water was so low that the members of the party themselves were compelled to walk, the men propelling the canoe by walking, one at the bow and the other at the stern. After three miles had been laboriously traversed in this fashion a Pottawatomie Indian was engaged to take the baggage and Tanner's children on horseback as far as the mouth of the Yellow Ochre River,[29] while Tanner and his companion continued to propel the now lightened canoe as before. On reaching the Yellow Ochre a sufficient depth of water was found to permit the further descent of the Illinois in the loaded canoe.

[28] Narrative of the Captivity and Adventures of John Tanner, 256-59. This work will be cited henceforth as Tanner's Narrative.

[29] The similarity of names and distance from Chicago render it probable that Tanner here refers to the Vermilion River.

Perhaps the most interesting account of the passage of the portage in the dry season, and in some respects the most detailed, is the one contained in the autobiography of Gurdon S. Hubbard.[30] Beginning with 1818, for several years, with a single exception, Hubbard accompanied the Illinois "brigade" of the American Fur Company on its annual autumnal trip from Mackinac by way of Lake Michigan and the Chicago Portage to the lower Illinois River. Only the first crossing of the portage, in October, 1818, is described in detail. Leaving Chicago the party, comprising about a dozen boat crews, camped a day on the South Branch near the present commencement of the Illinois and Michigan Canal, preparing to pass the boats through Mud Lake to the Des Plaines. Mud Lake drained both ways, into the Des Plaines, and through a narrow, crooked channel into the South Branch, and only in very wet seasons, Hubbard states, did it contain water enough to float an empty boat. The mud was very deep and the lake was surrounded by an almost impenetrable growth of wild rice and grass.

[30] Hubbard, Life, 39-41.

From the South Branch the empty boats were pulled up the channel leading from Mud Lake. In many places where there was a hard bottom and absence of water they were placed on short rollers, and in this way were propelled along until the lake was reached. Here mud, thick and deep, was encountered, but only at rare intervals was there any water. Four men stayed in the boat while six or eight more waded in the mud alongside. The former were equipped with boat-poles to the ends of which forked branches of trees had been fastened. By pushing with these against the hummocks, while the men in the mud lifted and shoved, the boat was jerked along. The men in the mud frequently sank to their waists, and at times were forced to cling to the boat to prevent going over their heads. Their limbs were covered with bloodsuckers which caused intense agony for several days, and sleep at night was rendered hopeless by the swarms of mosquitoes which assailed them. Yet three consecutive days of toil from dawn until dark under such conditions were required to pass all the boats through Mud Lake and reach the Des Plaines River.

The passage down the Des Plaines and the Illinois as far as the mouth of Fox River consumed almost three weeks more. Until Cache Island was reached the journey was comparatively easy, although even in this portion of the Des Plaines progress was frequently interrupted by the necessity of making portages or passing the boats along on rollers.[31] From Cache Island to the Illinois River the goods were carried on the men's backs most of the way, while the lightened boats were pulled over the shallow places, often being placed on poles and thus dragged over the rocks and shoals. In the autumn of 1823 Hubbard was sent to a post on the Iroquois River. To shorten his journey and "avoid the delays and hardships of the old route by way of Mud Lake and the Des Plaines" he resolved to travel to his destination by way of the St. Joseph Portage and the Kankakee River. A year later he was placed in charge of the Illinois River posts of the American Fur Company. He thereupon proceeded to execute a plan he had long urged upon his predecessor. The boats were unloaded on their return from Mackinac to Chicago, and scuttled in the swamp to insure their safety until they should be needed for the return voyage to Mackinac laden with furs the following spring. The goods and furs were transported between Chicago and the Indian hunting-grounds on pack horses. Thus "the long, tedious, and difficult passage" through Mud Lake into and down the Des Plaines was avoided.

[31] Ibid.

It is evident, then, that the chief factor in determining the character and length of the Chicago Portage was the Des Plaines River, and that during a large part of the year the portage that must be made extended much farther than simply from the Chicago to the Des Plaines. Schoolcraft and Cass in 1821 were compelled to abandon their canoe at Starved Rock, almost one hundred miles from Chicago. The traders whom they met in the course of their horseback journey were apparently planning to put their boats into the Des Plaines at Mount Joliet, after a portage of thirty miles. Whether, in view of Schoolcraft's own experience, they succeeded in entering the river at this point may well be doubted. The transcript of names from the account books kept by John Kinzie at Chicago[32] contains several entries of charges for assisting traders over the portage; some of these show that the portage was made from Mount Joliet, while one, in June, 1806, shows that it extended to the "forks" of the Illinois. Tanner's experience presents the extreme example, if his statement of distances can be relied on, of a portage of one hundred and twenty miles.[33] The varying length of the portage necessary at different seasons is well described in an official report made in 1819 by Graham and Phillips.[34] At one season there is an uninterrupted water communication between Lake Michigan and the Mississippi; at another season a portage of two miles; at another a portage of seven miles, from the Chicago River to the Des Plaines; and at still another, a portage of fifty miles, extending to the mouth of the Des Plaines.

[32] Barry, Rev. Wm., Transcript of Names in John Kinzie's Account Books, MS in the Chicago Historical Society library. This will be cited henceforth as the Barry Transcript.

[33] If, as suggested above, the Yellow Ochre was the same stream as the Vermilion River, the distance from Chicago to its mouth was about one hundred miles.

[34] State Papers, Doc. No. 17, 16th Congress, 1st Sess. Senator Benton claimed in 1847 that he had written this report from data supplied him by Graham and Phillips (Niles' Register, LXXII, 309).

These fluctuations in the state of the Des Plaines and in the length of the portage influenced materially the plans of the traders and travelers who had occasion to traverse this route. For obvious reasons in times when the Des Plaines was known to be low and the portage correspondingly long the Chicago route would be avoided if practicable. Thus Charlevoix preferred the Kankakee to it in 1721. A hundred years later, the Indians who had set out with Tanner upon learning of the low stage of the water in the Illinois, abandoned the journey and returned to their homes. St. Cosme's party in 1698 sought to reach the Illinois from Lake Michigan by the Root and Fox rivers, desisting from the effort only under the belief that this would necessitate a portage of forty leagues. Compelled to follow the Chicago route, the prospect of the long and difficult passage down the Des Plaines to navigable water on the Illinois induced them to leave all of their goods but one boat-load at Chicago in charge of a member of the party. This made necessary a return from the lower Mississippi for them the following spring, but even this was preferred to the arduous undertaking of transporting them over the long portage at Chicago in the dry season.

More significant, perhaps, is the fact that those who had occasion to cross the Chicago Portage, and were informed concerning the seasonal fluctuations of the Des Plaines, planned their business so as to take advantage, as far as possible, of the seasons of high water. Colonel Kingsbury, who in 1805 conducted a company of soldiers from Mackinac to the Mississippi by way of the Illinois River to establish Fort Belle Fontaine, was ordered to proceed to Chicago with them on the first vessel in the spring.[35] The Illinois River traders in the employ of the American Fur Company in the period from 1818 to 1824 so planned their business as to bring their boats laden with furs up the Des Plaines in the season of the spring flood.

[35] Cushing to Lieutenant-colonel Kingsbury, February 20, 1805. This letter belongs to the collection of letter books, letters, and other papers of Jacob Kingsbury in the Chicago Historical Society library. Kingsbury was in command of Detroit, Mackinac, and other northwestern posts from 1804 on, and for a time was the superior authority in charge of a group of posts including Fort Wayne, Fort Dearborn, Mackinac, and Detroit. His letters and papers constitute a source of prime importance for this period of northwestern history. They will be cited henceforth as the Kingsbury Papers.

La Salle had early contended that it was more feasible to transport goods between Chicago and Starved Rock with horses than by boats on the river. There arose very early a demand for another means of transportation between the two places at such times as the use of the Des Plaines in boats was impracticable, whether from excess or from deficiency of water. Lahontan represents, in his famous narrative of his Long River expedition,[36] that he returned by way of the Illinois River and Chicago Portage. To lessen the drudgery of "a great land carriage of twelve great leagues," he engaged four hundred Indians to transport his baggage from the Illinois village to Lake Michigan, "which they did in the space of four days." Historians have long agreed in denouncing the pretended Long River discovery as fraudulent, but there is nothing improbable about the statement of the necessity of a land carriage of twelve great leagues at the Chicago Portage.

[36] Lahontan, Voyages, I, 167 ff.

Whether Lahontan ever in fact employed four hundred Indians to transport his baggage over the Chicago Portage may well be doubted; but that other travelers employed Indians in a similar capacity is certain. The companions of Cavelier, La Salle's brother, who passed from Fort St. Louis to Lake Michigan in September, 1687, employed a dozen Shawnee Indians to carry their goods to the lake, because there was no water in the river at this season of the year.[37] Unable to make their way from Chicago to Mackinac they returned to the fort to pass the winter. In this same autumn of 1687, some Frenchmen en route from Montreal to Fort St. Louis with three canoes loaded with merchandise and ammunition were halted at Chicago on account of lack of water in the Des Plaines.[38] Upon information of this being brought to Tonty he engaged the services of forty Shawnee Indians, women and men, by whom the goods were transported to the fort.

[37] Joutel's Journal, in Margry, III, 482, 484.

[38] Ibid., 497.

When horses were first employed on the Chicago Portage cannot, of course, be stated. We have seen that La Salle advocated their employment, but he himself was never in a position to use them. That such use began very early, however, is indicated by a tradition preserved by Gurdon S. Hubbard of an adventure of a trader named Cerré on the Des Plaines.[39] The Indians sought to force him to pay toll to them, but he defied them; the controversy ended happily, however, and the Indians transported Cerré's goods on their pack horses from Cache Island to the mouth of the Des Plaines. The date of this incident is not recorded, but Cerré first came into the Illinois country in 1756. If the Indians were accustomed thus early to use pack horses to transport the goods of travelers it is not improbable that the practice may have originated long before.

[39] Hubbard, Life, 41-43.

The demand for transportation facilities at the portage was thus coeval with the advent of the French in this region. In the early nineteenth century the satisfaction of this demand afforded employment and a livelihood to some of the inhabitants of Chicago. The transporting of travelers and their baggage across the portage formed part of the business of John Kinzie. That it was Ouilmette's principal occupation, at least for a considerable period, seems probable.[40] Major Stoddard stated in 1812 concerning the Chicago Portage that in the dry season boats and their cargoes were transported across it by teams kept at Chicago for this purpose.[41] Several years later Graham and Phillips reported that there was a well-beaten road from the mouth of the Des Plaines to the lake, over which boats and their loads were hauled by oxen and vehicles kept for this purpose by the French settlers at Chicago.[42] Schoolcraft and Cass procured horses to convey them to Chicago from the point near Starved Rock where they abandoned their canoe. John Tanner's narrative shows that the Frenchman who carried him a distance of sixty miles from Chicago to the Illinois River in the preceding year was commonly engaged in this business. Probably this man was Ouilmette, although Tanner does not give his name. If it was someone other than Ouilmette, it is evident that at least two Chicago residents were engaged in this business.

[40] See Post, pp. 143-44; Tanner's Narrative, 257; Barry Transcript.

[41] Stoddard, Sketches, Historical and Descriptive, of Louisiana, 368 ff.

[42] State Papers, Doc. No. 17, 16th Congress, 1st Sess.

The project of Joliet of a canal to connect Lake Michigan with the Illinois River was revived early in the nineteenth century. After numerous investigations and reports had been made, the work of construction was at last begun, amid great enthusiasm, in the year 1836. Twelve years later the Illinois and Michigan Canal was completed, and therewith the Chicago Portage ceased to be. Even without the construction of the canal its old importance and use were about to terminate. The advance of white settlement sounded the death knell of the fur trade. With the advent of the railroad, trade and commerce sought other channels and another means of transportation. The waterways lost their old importance and the Chicago Portage passed into history. Ere this time, however, the New Chicago had been born and her future, with its marvelous possibilities, was secure.

CHAPTER II
CHICAGO IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY

It seems quite probable that Chicago was an important meeting-place for Indian travelers long before the first white men came to the foot of Lake Michigan. The portage of the Indian preceded the canoe of the white man, and the Indian trail was the forerunner of the white man's road. Who the first white visitor to Chicago was cannot be stated with certainty. The chief incentive to the exploration of the Northwest was the prosecution of the fur trade, and it is probable that wandering coureurs de bois had visited this region in advance of any of the explorers who have left us records of their travels. Coming to the domain of recorded history we encounter, on the threshold as it were, the master dreamer and empire builder, La Salle.

Already interested in the subject of western exploration, in the summer of 1669 he set out from his estate of Lachine in search of a river which flowed to the western sea.[43] His course to the western end of Lake Ontario is known to us, but from this point his movements for the next two years are involved in mist and obscurity. It is believed by some that he descended the Ohio to the Mississippi in 1670, and that the following year he traversed Lake Michigan from north to south, crossed the Chicago Portage, and descended the Illinois River till he again reached the Mississippi. But the claim that he reached the Mississippi during these years is rejected by most historians. Probably the exact facts as to his movements at this time will never be known. We are here interested, however, primarily in the question whether he came to the site of Chicago. Even this cannot be stated with certainty, but the preponderance of opinion among those best qualified to judge is that he probably did.[44]

[43] For this expedition and the subsequent movements of La Salle see Winsor, Cartier to Frontenac; Parkman, La Salle and the Discovery of the Great West; Winsor, Narrative and Critical History, IV, 201 ff.

[44] Margry was convinced of this and Parkman thought it entirely probable. Winsor thought that La Salle came to the head of Lake Michigan, but was in doubt whether he entered the Chicago River or the St. Joseph. Shea, who constantly belittles La Salle's achievements, believed he "reached the Illinois or some other affluent of the Mississippi." See the references given in note 43.

The pages of history might be scanned in vain for a more fitting character with which to begin the annals of the great city of today. La Salle is noted, even as it is noted, for boundless energy, lofty aspiration, and daring enterprise. He combined the capacity to dream with the resolution to make his visions real. "He was the real discoverer of the Great West, for he planned its occupation and began its settlement; and he alone of the men of his time appreciated its boundless possibilities, and with prophetic eye saw in the future its wide area peopled by his own race."[45]

[45] Edward G. Mason, "Early Visitors to Chicago," in New England Magazine, New Ser., VI, 189.

In strong contrast with the masterful La Salle succeeds, in the early annals of Chicago, the gentle, saintly Marquette. For a number of years vague and indefinite reports had been carried to Canada of the existence, to the west of the Great Lakes, of a "great river" flowing westwardly to the Vermilion Sea, as the Gulf of California was then known. These reports roused in the French the hope of finding an easy way to the South Sea, and thence to the golden commerce of the Indies.

Spurred on by the home government Talon, the intendant of Canada, took up the project of solving the problem of the great western river.[46] It chanced that for several years Marquette, a Jesuit missionary, had been stationed on the shore of Lake Superior. Here he heard from his dusky charges stories of the great river and of the pleasant country to the westward. In consequence he became imbued with the double ambition of solving the geographical question of the ultimate direction of the river's flow, and of seeking in this new region a more fruitful field of labor.[47] In the summer of 1672 Talon appointed Louis Joliet, a young Canadian who had already achieved something of a reputation as an explorer, to carry out the new task, and the projected exploration of the great river was launched. Joliet proceeded that autumn to Mackinac—the Michilimackinac of the French period—where he spent the winter preparing for the enterprise. Hither Marquette had come two years before, and here he had established the mission of St. Ignace. Proximity and a common interest in the projected enterprise combined to draw the two together; so that when the expedition set out from Mackinac in May, 1673, the party was composed of Joliet, Marquette, and five companions. Though Joliet was the official head of the expedition, it has come about, through the circumstance that his records were lost almost at the end of his toilsome journey, that we are chiefly indebted to the journal of Marquette for our knowledge of it, and have come insensibly to ascribe the credit for it to him.

[46] Winsor, Cartier to Frontenac, 231.

[47] Ibid., 199-201.

From Mackinac the party passed, in two canoes, to the head of Green Bay, and thence by way of the Fox-Wisconsin River route to the Mississippi, which was reached a month after the departure from the mission of St. Ignace.[48] Down its broad current the voyagers paddled and floated for another month. Arrived at the mouth of the Arkansas, they were told by the natives that the sea was distant but ten days' journey, and that the intervening region was inhabited by warlike tribes, equipped with firearms, and hostile to their entertainers. This information led the explorers to take counsel concerning their further course. Deeming it established beyond doubt that the river emptied into "the Florida or Mexican Gulf," and fearful of losing the fruits of their discovery by falling into the hands of the Spaniards, they decided to turn about and begin the homeward journey.

[48] Marquette's Journal of the expedition is printed in Jesuit Relations, Vol. LIX. For standard secondary accounts see the works of Parkman and Winsor.

On reaching the mouth of the Illinois they learned that they could shorten their return to Mackinac by passing up that river. A pleasing picture is drawn by Marquette of the country through which this new route led them. They had seen nothing comparable to it for fertility of soil, for prairies, woods, "cattle," and other game. The Indians received them kindly, and obliged Marquette to promise that he would return to instruct them. Under the guidance of an Indian escort the voyagers passed, probably by way of the Chicago Portage and River,[49] to Lake Michigan, whence they made their way to Green Bay by the end of September.

[49] It was the contention of Albert D. Hagar, a former secretary of the Chicago Historical Society, that on both this expedition and that of 1675 Marquette passed from the Des Plaines River to Lake Michigan by way of the Calumet Portage and River. (Andreas, History of Chicago, I, 46.) The evidence, however, seems to me to point to the route by way of the Chicago Portage and River. Hagar's argument is refuted by Hurlbut in Chicago Antiquities, 384-88.

The following year Joliet continued on his way to Quebec to report to Count Frontenac the results of his expedition. Marquette remained at Green Bay, worn down by the illness that was shortly to terminate his career. In the autumn of 1674, the disease having temporarily abated, he undertook the fulfilment of his promise to the Illinois Indians to return and establish a mission among them. Late in October he began the journey,[50] accompanied by two voyageurs, Pierre Porteret and Jacques, one of whom had been a member of the earlier expedition. The little party was soon increased by the addition of a number of Indians, and all together made their way down Green Bay and the western shore of Lake Michigan, to the mouth of the "river of the portage"—the Chicago. Over a month had been consumed in the journey, owing to frequent delays caused by the stormy lake. The river was frozen to the depth of half a foot and snow was plentiful. Ten days were passed here, when, Marquette's malady having returned, a camp was made two leagues up the river, close to the portage, and it was decided to spend the winter there. Thus began in December, 1674, the first extended sojourn, so far as we have record, of white men on the site of the future Chicago. There has been much loose writing concerning the character of their habitation. Even Parkman states that they constructed a "log hut," and other writers have made similar assertions. There is no warrant for this in the original documents, and all the circumstances of the case combine to render it improbable.[51] Marquette was too sick to travel, and he had but two companions to assist him. They made two camps, one at the entrance of the river, and the other, a few days later, at the portage. It was already the dead of winter, and they could not have been equipped with heavy tools. It seems entirely probable that in place of a "log hut" they constructed the customary Indian shelter or wigwam.[52]

[50] For Marquette's Journal of this expedition see Jesuit Relations, Vol. LIX. Parkman and Winsor have written standard secondary accounts.

Marquette found that two Frenchmen had preceded him in establishing themselves in the Illinois country. He designates them as "La Taupine and the surgeon," and says that they were stationed eighteen leagues below Chicago, "in a fine place for hunting cattle, deer, and turkeys."[53] They were supplied with corn and other provisions, and were engaged in the fur trade. Apparently their location was selected either because it was "a fine place for hunting," or else because of its advantages as a trading station, for it is evident from the narrative that they were in close proximity to the Indians.

[51] The French word used by Marquette, cabannez, was commonly employed, whether as a verb or a noun, to designate the ordinary temporary encampment of travelers and the wigwam of the Indian. In Marquette's Journal of his first expedition (Jesuit Relations, LIX, 146), the word is used to designate the cover of sailcloth erected over the voyagers' canoes to protect them from the mosquitoes and the sun while floating down the Mississippi. Later, on the second expedition, when Marquette, hastening along the eastern shore of Lake Michigan toward Mackinac, found himself at the point of death, his companions hastily landed and constructed a "wretched cabin of bark" to lay him in (ibid., 194). Numerous other instances of the habitual use of the word to indicate a temporary camp might easily be cited.

[52] For a further development of this subject see H. H. Hurlbut's pamphlet, Father Marquette at Mackinac and Chicago, 13-14.

[53] Jesuit Relations, LIX, 174-76.

Who were these French pioneers of the upper Illinois Valley? We know concerning La Taupine—the mole—that he was a noted fur trader whose real name was Pierre Moreau;[54] that he was an adherent of Count Frontenac, the governor of New France; and that he was accused by the intendant with being one of the Governor's agents in the prosecution of an illicit trade with the Indians. He had been with St. Lusson at the Sault Ste. Marie in 1671, and doubtless was possessed of all the information current among the French concerning the region beyond the Great Lakes. In what year he pushed out into this region and established the first habitation and business of a white man in northern Illinois will probably forever remain unknown.

[54] Ibid., 314; Mason, "Early Visitors to Chicago," cited in note 45.

The little that Marquette tells us of the companion of La Taupine serves only to whet our curiosity. Though these first residents were lawbreakers, they were not without redeeming qualities. In anticipation, apparently, of Marquette's arrival at their station they had made preparations to receive him, and had told the savages "that their cabin belonged to the black robe."[55] As soon as they learned of the priest's illness at Chicago the surgeon came, in spite of snow and bitter cold,[56] a distance of fifty miles to bring him some corn and blueberries. Marquette sent Jacques back with the surgeon to bear a message to the Indians who lived in his vicinity, and the traders loaded him, on his return, with corn and "other delicacies" for the sick priest. Furthermore, the surgeon was a devout man, for he spent some time with Marquette in order to perform his devotions. Clearly here is a character who improves with closer acquaintance. But such acquaintance is denied us. As a ship passing in the night the surgeon flashes across Chicago's early horizon; whence he came, whither he went, even his name will doubtless remain forever a mystery.

[55] Jesuit Relations, LIX, 176.

[56] The Journal records that the Indians were suffering from hunger because the cold and snow prevented them from hunting.

Meanwhile, how fared the winter with the three Frenchmen in their primitive camp near the portage? The picture of their life as painted in the pages of Marquette's Journal is not, on the whole, unattractive. The fraternal spirit manifested for them by the traders has already been noted. The Indians were equally friendly. When those living in a village six leagues away learned of Marquette's plight, they were so solicitous for his welfare, and so fearful that he would suffer from hunger, that, notwithstanding the cold, Jacques had much difficulty in preventing the young men from coming to the portage to carry away to their village all Marquette's belongings.

The Indians' fears, however, proved groundless. Deer and buffalo abounded, partridges, much like those of France, were killed, and turkeys swarmed around the camp. The traders sent corn and blueberries, and the Indians brought corn, dried meat, and pumpkins. The severe winter produced its effect upon the game, some of the deer that were killed being so lean as to be worthless. But "the Blessed Virgin Immaculate," Marquette's celestial queen, took such care of them that there was no lack of provisions, and when the camp was broken up in the spring there was still on hand a large sack of corn and a supply of meat.

An intense spirit of religious devotion animated Marquette throughout the winter. It was his zeal in the service of his Heavenly Master that had led him, in his illness, to brave the rigors of a winter in the wilderness. Despite his bodily affliction, the observance of religious exercises was maintained. Mass was said every day throughout the winter, but they were able to observe Lent only on Fridays and Saturdays. On December 15 the mass of the Conception was celebrated. Early in February a novena, or nine days' devotion to the Virgin, was begun, to ask God for the restoration of Marquette's health. Shortly afterward his condition improved, in consequence, as he believed, of these devotions. An opportunity to give his religion a practical application was afforded him in the latter part of January. A deputation of Illinois Indians came bringing presents, in return for which they requested, among other things, a supply of powder. Marquette refused this, saying he had come to instruct them and to restore peace, and did not wish them to begin a war with their neighbors, the Miamis.

Toward the end of March the ice began to thaw, but on breaking up it formed a gorge, causing a rapid rise in the river. The camping-place was suddenly flooded, the occupants having barely time enough to secure their goods upon the trees. They themselves spent the night on a hillock, with the water steadily gaining upon them. The following day the gorge dissolved, the ice drifted away, and the travelers prepared to resume their journey to the village of the Illinois.

Eleven days were consumed in this journey, during which Marquette suffered much from illness and exposure.[57] According to Father Dablon he was received by the Indians "as an angel from Heaven." He preached to them and established his mission, and then, feeling the hand of death upon him, began his return journey to the distant mission of St. Ignace.

[57] Marquette's Journal ends abruptly at this point, his last entry being made on April 6 while the little party was waiting at the Des Plaines River for the subsidence of the ice and the cold winds to permit them to descend. For the remainder of the story we are indebted to the narrative of Father Dablon, Marquette's superior, whose information was derived from the two companions of Marquette. Dablon's narrative is printed in Jesuit Relations, Vol. LIX.

And now we come to what may be regarded as the next scene in the annals of Chicago. A crowd of the Illinois accompanied Marquette, as a mark of honor, for more than thirty leagues, vying with each other in taking charge of his slender baggage. Then, "filled with great esteem for the gospel," they took leave of him, and continuing his journey he shortly afterward reached Lake Michigan.[58] The route followed from this point was by way of the eastern side of the lake. But the missionary's life was to terminate sooner than the voyage. On May 19 he died, on the lonely shore of the lake, and was buried near the mouth of a small river in the state of Michigan which was long to bear his name.

[58] The route followed by Marquette and his escort from the Illinois village to Lake Michigan is not certainly known. From the fact that after reaching the lake Marquette sought to reach Mackinac by following around its eastern shore, it has been argued that he ascended the Kankakee to reach Lake Michigan. The evidence seems to me, however, to favor the route by the Des Plaines and Chicago. Marquette had gone this way on the return from his first expedition, and had returned to the Illinois the same way. If he now followed this route, the thirty leagues which the Indians accompanied him would have brought them to the vicinity of the portage between the Des Plaines and the Chicago. In the period when travel was chiefly by water portages were natural meeting (and parting) places. The one argument in support of the Kankakee route is the fact that the further route of the party was along the eastern shore of the lake. But this fact does not obviate the possibility of a return to the lake by the Des Plaines and Chicago. Furthermore, by the Kankakee route from the point where the Indians turned back Marquette would still have to travel upward of one hundred and fifty miles to reach the lake. Yet the narrative states that he reached it "shortly after" they left him—a statement which harmonizes with the supposition that the leave-taking occurred at or near the Chicago Portage. For these reasons I have chosen to consider this an event in early Chicago history.

A successor to Marquette at the mission of the Illinois was found in the person of Father Claude Allouez, who was then stationed at the mission of St. Francis Xavier at Green Bay. In October, 1676, with two companions he set out in a canoe for his new field of work.[59] The winter closed down early, however, and before they had proceeded far they were compelled to lie over until February with some Pottawatomie Indians. Then they proceeded once more, in a way "very extraordinary"; for instead of putting the canoe into the water, they placed it upon the ice, over which a sail and a favoring wind "made it go as on the water." When the wind failed they drew it along by means of ropes. New obstacles to their progress arose, however, so that not until April did they enter "the river which leads to the Illinois." At its entrance they were met by a band of eighty Illinois Indians who had come from their village to welcome Allouez. The ceremony of reception which ensued may well be set forth in the words of the missionary himself, in whose honor it was staged.

[59] The narrative of Allouez is printed in Jesuit Relations, Vol. LX. The quotations from it which follow are from the Thwaites translation there given.

"The captain came about 30 steps to meet me, carrying in one hand a firebrand and in the other a Calumet adorned with feathers. Approaching me, he placed it in my mouth and himself lighted the tobacco, which obliged me to make a pretense of smoking it. Then he made me come into his Cabin, and having given me the place of honor, he spoke to me as follows:

'My Father, have pity on me; suffer me to return with thee, to bear thee company and take thee into my village. The meeting I have had today with thee will prove fatal to me if I do not use it to my advantage. Thou bearest to us the gospel and the prayer. If I lose the opportunity of listening to thee, I shall be punished by the loss of my nephews, whom thou seest in so great number; without doubt, they will be defeated by our enemies. Let us embark, then, in company, that I may profit by thy coming into our land.'"

It is not to be supposed that the exact words of the "Captain" have been preserved, though it may well be that the general tenor of his remarks is here set forth. The speech concluded, they set out together, and "shortly after" arrived at the Chief's abode. We have no clue, further than this, to the location of the Indian camp. Probably it was in the vicinity of the portage; for aside from the fact that this furnished a logical stopping-place Marquette tells us that during his sojourn here, two years before, Indians were encamped in his vicinity during a portion of the winter.

After a brief stay among the Indians on the Illinois, where his labors met with great success, Allouez left them, returning again the next year. We have no details of these journeys, however, and our next account of the presence of white men in this region involves us in the schemes and deeds of the masterful La Salle.

La Salle conceived the ambitious design of leading France and civilization together into the valley of the Mississippi.[60] But vast obstacles interposed to hinder him in its execution. Canada must be his base of operations, and Canada abounded in hostile traders and priests who jealously sought to checkmate him at every opportunity. The initiation of his design involved the establishment of a colony in the Illinois country. In 1678 he sent out in advance a party of men to engage in trade for him and ultimately to go to the Illinois country and prepare for his coming. Meanwhile he himself was busied with further preparations for the execution of his project; a sailing vessel was constructed close above Niagara Falls, and in August, 1678, its sails were spread upon Lake Erie for the voyage around the upper lakes. Arrived at Green Bay, the vessel was loaded with furs and started on its return, while La Salle and fourteen followers, in four canoes, continued their way down the western shore of Lake Michigan. The party laboriously made its way past the site of the modern cities of Milwaukee and Chicago and around the southern end of the lake to the mouth of the St. Joseph River. This had been agreed upon as the place of rendezvous with Tonty, La Salle's faithful lieutenant, who with twenty men was toiling, meanwhile, down the eastern side of the lake from Mackinac. Tonty had been delayed, and La Salle employed the period of waiting for him in building Fort Miami on an eminence near the mouth of the river. This became, therefore, the oldest fort in this region, and constituted an important base of operations for the prosecution of his designs.

[60] For the original documents pertaining to La Salle's work see Margry's collection. For standard secondary accounts see the works of Parkman and Winsor. I have drawn freely upon these in preparing this portion of my own narrative.

At last Tonty arrived, bringing news which rendered probable the loss of La Salle's sailing vessel, the "Griffin," with her cargo of furs. Early in December the combined party ascended the St. Joseph River to the portage leading to the Kankakee, near the site of the modern city of South Bend. Down the latter river they passed and into the Illinois, until they came to the great Indian village, in the vicinity of Starved Rock, where Marquette and Allouez had labored as missionaries during the past five years. The place was deserted, however, the inhabitants having departed for their annual winter hunt. The journey was resumed, therefore, as far as Lake Peoria, near which place a village of the Illinois was found.

A parley was held with the Indians, in the course of which La Salle unfolded his design of building a fort in their midst, and a "great wooden Canoe" on the Mississippi, which would go down to the sea, and return thence with the goods they so much desired. La Salle was successful in overcoming alike the suspicions of the natives, the intrigues of his enemies, and the disloyalty of his own men. A site suitable for a fort was selected, and here in the dead of winter was constructed the first civilized habitation of a permanent character in the modern state of Illinois; the Indians gave to the fort the name of Checagou, but by La Salle it was christened Fort Crevecoeur.

La Salle had thus established himself in the heart of the Mississippi Valley, and had initiated the work of carving out what was to become the imperial domain of French Louisiana. But the major portion of that work lay yet before him, and difficulties were to succeed one another in its prosecution until the leader's death at the hands of a hidden assassin was to terminate his life in seeming failure. It is not our purpose here to attempt a history of La Salle's career; rather our aim is to sketch such of its salient features as may be pertinent to the unfolding of the story of the genesis of Chicago. The loss of the "Griffin" imposed upon La Salle the necessity of returning to Fort Frontenac for supplies. Having urged forward the construction of his fort and arranged for the departure of Hennepin and his associates on what eventuated in their famous exploration of the upper waters of the Mississippi, La Salle left Tonty in command at Fort Crevecoeur, and himself, in March, 1680, set forth on his long and terrible journey. In its course he again paused near Starved Rock, noted the ease with which it might be defended, and passing on to Fort Miami, dispatched orders to Tonty to occupy and fortify it. He then crossed on foot the trackless waste of southern Michigan in the season of spring floods, and came at last to his destination. He spent some months in setting his affairs in order, and in August, 1680, set out on the return to Illinois, passing by way of Mackinac and thence down the eastern side of Lake Michigan to Fort Miami.

Meanwhile, what of Tonty and affairs at Fort Crevecoeur? Faithful to his orders, Tonty, on receipt of the dispatch which La Salle had sent forward from Fort Miami, set forth to occupy Starved Rock. In his absence the men left at Fort Crevecoeur, spurred on by the tales of financial disaster to La Salle related by the new arrivals, rose in mutiny. They destroyed the fort, stole its provisions, and writing on the side of the unfinished vessel the legend Nous sommes tons sauvages—"We are all savages"—departed. Upon the heels of this disaster succeeded a still greater menace to La Salle's designs. It was essential to their success that the Illinois Indians should retain peaceable possession of their territory. But now came against them a war party of the terrible Iroquois. They assailed and destroyed the village at the Rock and pursued the fleeing Illinois until the scattered survivors found refuge across the Mississippi.

The indomitable Tonty, almost alone in this sea of savagery, had done what he could to save the Illinois from destruction. His efforts proved vain, and with his few followers he fled from impending destruction. Their goal was distant Mackinac, and their route was up the Illinois and the Des Plaines to Lake Michigan and thence northward along its western shore. Doubtless the forlorn little party passed by Chicago, though we have no direct details as to this portion of their journey. Hardships and dangers in abundance were endured before the survivors found refuge with a band of friendly Pottawatomies at some point to the southward of Green Bay.

Shortly after the destruction of the Illinois La Salle, in ignorance of what had happened, came from Fort Miami to the relief of Tonty. In the ghastly remains of the village at Starved Rock he read the story of this new disaster to his plans. Failing to find the bodies of Tonty and his companions among them, he followed in the track of the pursued and pursuing savages until he reached the Mississippi. Concluding at last that Tonty had not come this way he retraced his steps to the junction of the Kankakee with the Des Plaines, and turning up the latter stream soon found traces of Tonty's party. It was now the dead of winter. Convinced of Tonty's escape, La Salle abandoned the canoes, which he had dragged with him on sledges thus far and made his way overland through extreme cold and deep snow to Fort Miami, where he arrived at the end of January.

The design was now conceived by La Salle of welding the western tribes into a confederation, which, under the guidance of himself and his French followers, should oppose the marauding incursions of the Iroquois into the West. The year 1681 was devoted to the furthering of this project and to the gathering of La Salle's scattered resources for a renewal of his attempt at establishing himself in the Mississippi Valley. Late in the year he was again at Fort Miami with a considerable party of French and Indians, ready for the exploit which has given him his greatest fame—the descent of the Mississippi to its mouth.

From Fort Miami the route followed led around the foot of Lake Michigan to Chicago; thence across the portage and down the Des Plaines, the Illinois, and the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico. The expedition set forth in two divisions, Tonty with the first crossing over to the Chicago River in the closing days of December, 1681, where he prepared sledges for transporting the canoes and equipment on the ice, and awaited the arrival of his chief. La Salle with the second division arrived early in January, and after a detention of a few days, occasioned by unfavorable weather, the united party set out, dragging their sledges on the surface of the frozen rivers until open water was reached below Lake Peoria. There they embarked, and three months later, on April 9, 1682, at the mouth of the Great River he had descended La Salle took formal possession, under the name of Louisiana, of all the vast country drained by it and by its tributaries, stretching "from the Alleghenies to the Rocky Mountains; from the Rio Grande and the Gulf to the farthest springs of the Missouri."[60]

[60] Parkman, La Salle, chap. xxi.

La Salle's discovery of the mouth of the Mississippi caused him to broaden his projects. He would establish a colony at the mouth of the Great River to serve as an outlet for his colony on the Illinois where he hoped to gather the furs on which he relied to render his whole vast enterprise commercially successful. The prosecution of his designs, therefore, depended ultimately on his ability to make the Illinois colony profitable. On his return to Mackinac from the descent of the Mississippi, in the autumn of 1682, he learned that the Iroquois were about to renew their attacks upon the West. The best efforts of himself and Tonty were now directed, therefore, to the fortification of Starved Rock, which he planned to serve as the center of his colony and its rock of defense against the invader.

Here, on a cliff which rises sheer from the water's edge to a height of one hundred and twenty-five feet, with its crest about an acre in extent, and accessible only by a narrow pathway in the rear, during the winter of 1682 and 1683 the fort was constructed. At the same time the work of alliance with the Indians went vigorously forward until from the lofty ramparts of St. Louis, the name given by La Salle to his fortress, the leader could look down upon the lodges of four thousand warriors, gathered from half a score of tribes, and a total population of upward of twenty thousand souls. The stability of the colony thus gathered depended on La Salle's ability to protect his allies against the Iroquois, and to furnish them with goods and a market for their furs.

La Salle's career shows that over natural obstacles and the wiles of the red man he could rise triumphant, but that he was no match for the intriguing enemies of his own race. By these his plans were shipwrecked once more, and for the last time, so far as his Illinois career was concerned. Count Frontenac, his staunch supporter hitherto, was recalled, and the new governor, De la Barre, pursued a policy of unscrupulous hostility toward him. His ammunition and supplies to sustain himself against the Iroquois were detained, lying reports about him were sent to the home government, and finally a force was sent to supersede him in command of Fort St. Louis.

La Salle's only remedy against such an enemy was to appeal in person to his monarch. Leaving Tonty in command of the colony he went, by way of Canada, to France, whence he embarked upon the enterprise which was to end so disastrously in the wilds of Texas. Under the guidance of others Louisiana became, in the following century, the fairest province of New France. Wrested from French control by the Anglo-Saxon, it has come in time to constitute the heart and center of our magnificent national domain. The geographical monuments to the memory of La Salle are few; a county in Texas, a city and a county in Illinois are all, aside from a few insignificant post towns, that bear his name. Yet in the eyes of history he will always be regarded as the father of Louisiana, a province as favored by Nature, as imperial in character, as any the sun ever shone upon.

Since 1678 La Salle's chief lieutenant in the prosecution of his enterprises had been the capable and valorous Tonty.[62] La Salle's mission to the French Court in 1684 had resulted in the restoration of Tonty to command at Fort St. Louis. On the death of La Salle he sought to step into his former leader's place, and to complete the establishment of the French power in the Mississippi Valley. For a dozen years longer he held his lofty post of St. Louis, seeking meanwhile to interest the French Court in the uncompleted design of his former chief. But other and more powerful interests held the ear of the distant monarch, and his efforts were in vain. Finally, in 1700 an expedition was sent out under the command of Iberville to take possession of the mouth of the Mississippi. A settlement was made at Biloxi Bay, and hither Tonty came, abandoning his fort at the Rock, and joining his efforts in support of the more powerful enterprise. After four years more of service in the cause in which he had first enlisted under La Salle's banner, he died at Biloxi of yellow fever. There in September, 1704, "was dug the grave of the most unselfish and loyal, as he was one of the most courageous and intrepid, of the many knightly men who blazed the path whence entered civilization into what later became known as the old Northwest."[63]

[62] The story of Tonty is told by Parkman in connection with his account of La Salle. "Henry de Tonty," a sketch and appreciation of Tonty's career by Henry E. Legler, is printed in Parkman Club Publications, No. 3. For an English translation of Tonty's own modest narrative of his career to 1693 see French, Historical Collections of Louisiana, I, 52 ff.

[63] Legler, op. cit., 37.

STARVED ROCK, THE SITE OF FORT ST. LOUIS

(By courtesy of the Chicago Historical Society)

During Tonty's occupancy of Fort St. Louis in the period following the death of La Salle a number of travelers passed between Lake Michigan and the Mississippi by the Chicago-Illinois route the records of whose experiences are still preserved. One of the most interesting of these narratives is that of Joutel, the companion of Cavelier.[64] Their party comprised the sole survivors of La Salle's ill-fated Texan expedition who returned to France and civilization. They came, a band of five forlorn fugitives, up the Mississippi and the Illinois, arriving at Fort St. Louis in September, 1687. Carefully concealing the fact of La Salle's death, they obtained means to continue their journey, and soon set out for Lake Michigan accompanied by a dozen savages who carried their goods and baggage, because of the lack of water in the Des Plaines. On the twenty-fifth they arrived at Chicago and there found a canoe left by some Frenchmen who had recently passed down to Fort St. Louis. Their lack of experience as canoemen, together with contrary winds and bad weather, caused a delay of eight days at this place. Meanwhile the season was advancing and their scanty supply of provisions was being consumed. The state of mind to which they were reduced is naively shown by the record of Joutel that one of the party, having shot at some chickens and cracked his gun, "was so provoked that it gave him a fever."

[64] For the story of Cavelier's party see Joutel's Journal printed in Margry, III, 89-535. An abridged and distorted English translation of the Journal was published in 1714, and this was reprinted at Albany in 1906 under the editorial direction of Henry Reed Stiles.

Finally they embarked on the lake and advanced some eight or ten leagues along the shore to the northward, striving to come to the villages of the Pottawatomies, where they hoped to procure a fresh supply of food. The effort was a pitiful failure. Starvation lay before them; the loss of a year of time with the consequently lessened prospect of affording succor in season to the survivors of La Salle's colony in Texas, and the danger of the discovery of their guilty secret concerning their leader's fate, awaited their return to Fort St. Louis.

They decided, however, to turn back. It was a dejected party we may well believe, which came early in October to the entrance of the Chicago River. Here they made a cache in which they concealed their goods, put their canoe upon a scaffold, and retraced their steps to Fort St. Louis. In this place they passed the winter, and from them we get our fullest description of the fort, and of the manner of life that prevailed there. Some three weeks after their arrival at the fort Tonty returned from his participation in Denonville's famous campaign against the Iroquois. From Fort St. Louis he had led sixteen Frenchmen and two hundred Indians to share in this distant enterprise. With a baseness which is difficult to excuse the fugitives deceived him concerning the death of La Salle, and after accepting his hospitality through the winter secured from him, on the assumption that La Salle was still alive, a considerable quantity of furs and other supplies.

Taking advantage of the spring floods they set out once more for Chicago, March 21, 1688. They arrived on March 29, after a toilsome journey. Because of the swiftness of the river they were compelled to wade in the water, pulling their canoes, much of the way. Joutel avers that he suffered more on this short trip than he had done before since his departure from the Gulf of Mexico. Again bad weather compelled them to delay at Chicago, this time for ten days. There was little game and they had only corn meal to eat. But Providence furnished them "a kind of manna" to eat with their meal, which appears from the description to have consisted of maple sap. They also procured in the woods garlic and other edible plants, and Joutel records that Chicago takes its name, as they were informed, from the profusion of garlic growing in the surrounding woods.[65]

[65] Margry, III, 485.

The members of Joutel's party passed on to Canada, and here we may leave them to pursue their way, burdened with their terrible secret, as best they may. Our interest meanwhile shifts to the story of Father Pinet and his mission of the Guardian Angel. We have seen that commerce and the Cross entered the upper Mississippi Valley together in 1673, in the persons of Joliet and Marquette. During the succeeding years the efforts of the servants of the Cross to gain control of this region were scarcely less zealous than were those of the devotees of trade. The missionary accompanied, sometimes even preceded, the explorer in his journeys, seeking everywhere to introduce the doctrine of the true faith and win the natives to the Church. The representatives of the Jesuit order were the most active agents of the Church in this work of proselyting. Under its auspices Marquette had established the Illinois Mission. Its vicissitudes of fortune were as various as those of La Salle himself, but, on the whole, it was as successful as any in all the annals of Catholic missions to the red man.[66]

[66] For the history of the Illinois Mission see Shea, Catholic Missions among the Indian Tribes of the United States, chaps, xxii, xxiii.

We are more particularly concerned with that portion of the work of the Jesuits among the Illinois which pertains to the mission of the Guardian Angel at Chicago.[67] This was established in 1696 by Father Pierre Pinet, who had been stationed at Mackinac for a couple of years. According to the Jesuit records, however, Pinet was soon driven from Chicago and his mission broken up by no less a person than Count Frontenac, governor of New France.[68] An appeal to Bishop Laval resulted in a cessation of Frontenac's opposition, which, in the eyes of Pinet's associates, amounted to persecution. The mission of the Guardian Angel was accordingly resumed in 1698, but two years later it was permanently abandoned.

[67] For a brief biographical sketch of Pinet see Jesuit Relations, LXIV, 278. Various references to Pinet scattered throughout the Jesuit Relations have been collected by Frank R. Grover in his lecture on Pinet and his mission of the Guardian Angel of Chicago, published by the Chicago Historical Society in 1907.

[68] Letter of Gravier to Laval, September 17, 1697, Jesuit Relations, LXV, 52.

Pinet was a man of deeds rather than words, and has himself left no account of his mission. The statements of his associates show that he was successful in his work here; the adult Indians, "hardened in debauchery," paid little heed to his teachings, but the young were baptized, and even the medicine men, who were the most inveterate opponents of Christianity, manifested a desire to have their children instructed.[69] It was Pinet's practice to spend only the summer season at Chicago. The winters he spent with the missionaries lower down on the Illinois, or in following his charges on their annual hunt.[70]

[69] Ibid., 70; Shea, Early Voyages Up and Down the Mississippi, 53-54.

[70] Jesuit Relations, LXV, 70; Shea, op. cit., 53, 59.

The site of the mission of the Guardian Angel has long been a subject of misapprehension. Aside from the general allusions to the mission as being at Chicago, the document of chief importance in determining its location is the letter of St. Cosme of January 2, 1699.[71] He had passed during the preceding autumn and early winter, in company with a party of associates, from Mackinac to the Mississippi by way of Green Bay, the Chicago Portage, and the Illinois River route, and the letter is, in fact, a report concerning this trip. The party spent some time at Pinet's mission, detained by storms and other obstacles. From a study of this letter, as printed by Shea, Grover concludes that the mission was situated above the modern Chicago on the North Shore, near the present village of Gross Point.[72]

[71] Printed in Shea, op. cit., 45 ff.

[72] Grover, Pinet, 167 ff.

Shea's translation of St. Cosme's letter, however, frequently departs from the original manuscript.[73] Because of this fact, reference to the latter deprives Grover's argument of whatever force it might otherwise possess.[74] It shows that St. Cosme's party left the site of the modern city of Racine on October 17, and having been detained by wind, cabined three days later "five leagues from Chikagwa." This they should have reached early on the twenty-first, but a wind suddenly springing up from the lake obliged them to land "half a league from Etpikagwa." Here the priests left their baggage with the canoemen, and went "by land" to the house of Father Pinet, which they say was built on the bank of the little river, having on one side the lake and on the other a fine large prairie. On the twenty-fourth, the wind having fallen, they had their canoes brought with all their baggage, and, the waters being extremely low, placed everything not absolutely necessary for their further journey in a cache, to be sent for the following spring. Finally on the twenty-ninth they started from Chicago and encamped for the night at the portage, two leagues up the river.

[73] This is preserved in the archives of Laval University at Quebec. I have used an attested copy made "with the greatest possible fidelity" by Father Gosselin, archivist of Laval University, in the Chicago Historical Society library.

[74] Aside from the inaccuracy of Shea's translation of St. Cosme's letter, on which Grover bases his argument, he has made it the basis of a number of unwarranted and erroneous conclusions.

It is clear from this account that "Etpikagwa" was a point on the lake not more than fifteen miles north of Chicago; that here the party landed early on October 21, and the priests, leaving the boatmen behind, went by land to Pinet's house. Grover says that this shows the mission was not on the lake shore, and that they went inland to reach it; and he further assumes that they proceeded but a short distance. In fact, it shows neither of these things, and since three days elapsed before the canoes were sent for, there is nothing in the account inconsistent with the supposition that the priests proceeded a distance of fifteen miles down the lake shore in coming to the mission.

On the contrary, the account directly supports this supposition. If the mission was inland near the Skokie marsh, as Grover supposes, they could hardly have had the canoes brought to it on the twenty-fourth. The supposition that it was located at the modern Chicago is strengthened by St. Cosme's account of the departure from Chicago. Having sent for the canoes on the twenty-fourth, the party started from Chicago on the twenty-ninth and camped for the night two leagues up the river at the beginning of the portage. They had been staying with Father Pinet, and Father Pinet was at "Chikagwa." Now they depart from "Chikagwa," and two leagues away, "where the little river loses itself in the prairies," and at the commencement of the portage they camp. Pinet's mission was, then, apparently, near the mouth of the Chicago River. Reverting to the description already given of it as "on the bank of the little river, having on one side the lake, and on the other a fine large prairie," we find nothing to conflict with this conclusion.

Finally, St. Cosme records that having made half of the portage they were delayed by the discovery that a little boy, who had joined the party, had wandered off. St. Cosme with four of the men turned back next day to look for him. Their quest was unsuccessful, and the next day being All Saints', St. Cosme was obliged to go and pass the night at Chicago. Mass having been said early, the following day was devoted to the search. Evidently the Chicago here referred to was not, as Grover supposes, located on the North Shore fifteen miles above the mouth of the river. On the contrary, it must have been within a reasonable distance of the portage where the boy was lost. From every point of view the study of St. Cosme's letter leads to the conclusion that the mission of the Guardian Angel was on the Chicago River at some point between the forks and the mouth.

The members of St. Cosme's party proceeded on their way, having left a man at Chicago in charge of some of their supplies, and without having found the lost boy. After spending the winter among the tribes along the lower Mississippi, the party retraced its steps northward.[75] St. Cosme remained among the Tamaroas at Cahokia, while his companions continued on their way to Chicago, where they arrived on "maundy Thursday." One of them records that the boy who had been lost made his way to Chicago after thirteen days, utterly exhausted and "out of his head." In the spring of 1700 Father Pinet abandoned his mission at Chicago and joined St. Cosme at Cahokia, where he died a few years later.[76] Therewith Chicago ceased to be a place of residence for white men for almost a century. Owing to causes which will be set forth in the following chapter, the frequent visits made by the French in the seventeenth century ceased, and the story of Chicago during the first half of the eighteenth century concerns itself almost wholly with the terrible Indian wars which desolated the Northwest during this period.

[75] On the travels and experiences of the missionaries see their letters in Shea, Early Voyages Up and Down the Mississippi.

[76] Citations from the Jesuit Relations in Grover, Pinet, 162-64. The date of Pinet's death is variously given as 1702 and 1704.

Much has been said and written on the subject of a fort at Chicago in the French period. In the Treaty of Greenville of 1795 one of the cessions which General Wayne extorted from the tribes was a tract of land six miles square at the mouth of the Chicago River "where a fort formerly stood."[77] Since the English never had a fort at Chicago, the allusion is obviously to one belonging to the French. Thomas Hutchins, the first and only civil "geographer of the United States,"[78] who himself had traveled extensively in the Northwest, placed an "Indian Village and Fort" at the entrance of the Chicago River on the map which accompanied his famous Topographical Description of 1778. Many earlier maps might be cited to show the existence of a fort at Chicago in the French period.[79] Coming to secondary accounts, most of the local histories which treat of early Chicago with any degree of fullness credit the French fort tradition.[80] Mr. Edward G. Mason, a zealous worker in the field of Illinois history, even thought there was a fort at Chicago from 1685 until the end of French control in this region.[81]

[77] American State Papers, Indian Affairs, I, 562.

[78] Hutchins, Topographical Description of Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and North Carolina, 7.

[79] E.g., Hennepin, Nouvelle découverte d'un tres grand pays situé dans l'Amérique, Utrecht, 1697, I, (facing) I. This map was frequently copied by others in the years following its first appearance. Jean Baptiste Homann's map of North and South America (copy in Chicago Historical Society library), of unknown date, but probably about the year 1700; Bellin, Carte de l'Amérique septentrionale, 1755; Jean Roque's map of North America, 1754-61.

[80] See among others Mason, Chapters from Illinois History, 163-64; Hurlbut, Chicago Antiquities, 164, 171, 360-61, 592; Blanchard, Discovery and Conquests of the Northwest with the History of Chicago, I, 68 (this work will be cited henceforth as The Northwest and Chicago); Davidson and Stuvé, History of Illinois, 260. Many other works and historical articles speak more or less briefly of the supposed French fort at Chicago; see for example Andreas, History of Chicago, I, 79; Shea, "Chicago from 1673 to 1825," in Historical Magazine, V, 103.

[81] Mason, "Early Visitors to Chicago," 201-2.

Despite these numerous assertions, however, it is extremely doubtful whether the French ever had a regular fort at Chicago, and it can be shown conclusively that if so it existed for but a short period only. La Salle and Tonty passed by Chicago at various times and their movements are known during the entire period of La Salle's activities in Illinois. But for two exceptions, to be noted shortly, they nowhere speak of a fort at Chicago at this time, and the evidence that there was none, though negative, may be regarded as conclusive. There was no establishment at Chicago in 1687 when Cavalier La Salle's party was here vainly seeking to push on to Mackinac; nor in 1688 when the same party, having wintered at Fort St. Louis, again tarried at Chicago while on its way to Canada. There is no evidence that such a fort was established in the succeeding decade; and there is negative evidence to the contrary, both in the fact that St. Cosme makes no mention of a fort at Chicago at the time of his visit and that the French government gave only a grudging permission to Tonty to continue at Fort St. Louis, limiting his yearly operations to two canoes of merchandise, and finally, by royal decree, directing the abandonment of the fort.[82]

We have thus arrived at the beginning of the eighteenth century. Did the French have a fort at Chicago between the years 1700 and 1763? James Logan's report to Governor Keith in 1718, upon the French establishment in the interior, which was used by Keith in his memorial to the Board of Trade, so asserts. By the latter the statements of Logan were incorporated in a report to the king,[83] and this, apparently, was the source of Popple's representation of a "Fort Miamis" at Chicago on his great Map of the British Empire in America of 1732.[84] In spite of this contemporary evidence, which has gained the approval of many historians, it may confidently be asserted that no such fort existed at Chicago in the eighteenth century. That there was no fort here in 1715 is shown by two independent sources. In November of this year, Claude de Ramezay, acting governor, and Begon, intendant of New France, in a report to the French minister dealing in part with the military situation in the region between the upper lakes and the Mississippi, recommended the establishment of several new posts.[85] Among the number a post at "Chicagou" was urged, "to facilitate access to the Illinois and the miamis, and to keep those nations in our interests." If a fort already existed at Chicago the two highest officials in New France would have been aware of the fact, and there would have been no reason for this recommendation. In this same year, 1715, as part of an elaborately planned campaign against the Fox Indians of Wisconsin, the French arranged for the rendezvous at Chicago of forces from Detroit, from the Wabash, and from the lower Illinois River settlements.[86] A series of mishaps caused a complete miscarriage of plans for the campaign; but these very mishaps show there was at all events no garrison at Chicago. The three parties which were to effect a junction here arrived at different times, and, ignorant of the movements of the others, each in turn abandoned the expedition and retired. Obviously if there had been a garrison at Chicago it would have constituted an important factor in planning the campaign; and the various bands which were to effect a junction here would have been informed, on their arrival, of the movements of the others.

[82] Legler, "Henry de Tonty"; Winsor, Cartier to Frontenac, 340.

[83] Printed in O'Callaghan, New York Colonial Documents, V, 620-21.

[84] Popple states that his map was undertaken with the approbation of the Lords of Trade; and that it is based upon maps, charts, and especially the records transmitted to them by the governors of the British colonies and others.

[85] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 327 ff.

[86] Ibid., 313 ff.

That there was no French establishment at Chicago in 1721 is evident from the journal of Father Charlevoix. In this year he was touring the interior of America on a royal commission to examine and report to his king the condition of New France. His letters and history constitute the most authoritative eighteenth century source for the history of New France. In the very month of September, 1721, when the British Board of Trade report was made, Charlevoix passed from Fort St. Joseph, where the city of Niles, Michigan, now stands, down the Kankakee and the Illinois to Peoria, and beyond.[87] He had first intended to pass through Chicago, but a storm on the lake, together with information of the impossibility of navigating the Des Plaines in a canoe at this season, led him to follow the route by the St. Joseph Portage and the Kankakee. His journal is detailed and explicit; he carefully describes the various posts and routes of communication. He had planned to pass by Chicago, and had informed himself concerning the portage and the Des Plaines River. Yet he gives no hint of a fort here, a thing incomprehensible if such a fort had in fact existed.

[87] Charlevoix, Histoire et description générale de la Nouvelle France, avec le journal historique d'un voyage fait par ordre du roi dans l'Amérique septentrionale, letters of September 14 and 17, 1721.

There is abundant evidence in the sources pertaining to the operations of the French in the Northwest that they had no fort at Chicago after 1721. In connection with the Fox wars numerous campaigns were waged in which the Chicago garrison, if there had been such, would have participated. Yet no such force is ever mentioned, and some of the sources make it positively evident that there was neither garrison nor fort here. In 1727 the holding of a great conference with the Foxes the following year at Starved Rock or Chicago was proposed.[88] If this were done it was deemed necessary for the French to be first on the spot appointed for the rendezvous "to erect a fort" and otherwise prepare for the council. The project never materialized, however, and so the fort was not built. In 1730, when the French succeeded in trapping and destroying a large band of the Foxes in the vicinity of Starved Rock,[89] parties came to the scene of conflict from many directions—from Ouiatanon, St. Joseph, Fort Chartres, and elsewhere; but none came from Chicago, although it was nearer the scene than any of the places from which the French forces did come—obviously because there was no garrison at Chicago. In the early winter of 1731-32 a Huron-Iroquois war party passed from Detroit to St. Joseph and thence around the southern end of Lake Michigan and on into Wisconsin to attack the Foxes.[90] The party paused at Chicago long enough to build a fort in which to leave their sick. This "fort" was evidently a temporary Indian shelter, but it is also evident that if an ungarrisoned French fort had been standing here, the construction of such a shelter would have been unnecessary. An official list of the commanders of the various western posts a dozen years later is preserved in the French colonial archives.[91] The posts at Detroit, Mackinac, Green Bay, St. Joseph, Ouiatanon, and elsewhere are mentioned, but the name of Chicago is not included in the list. Finally an exhaustive memoir upon the posts and trade of the interior of the continent by Bougainville in 1757 includes no mention of a post at Chicago, although the neighboring posts which are known to have existed at this time receive careful attention.[92]

[88] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVII, 3-6.

[89] Ibid., 109-20.

[90] Ibid., 148-50.

[91] Ibid., 432-33.

[92] Ibid., XVIII, 167 ff.

It is evident, then, that the French had no fort at Chicago during the eighteenth century. Did they have one here at any time during the seventeenth? Two exceptions to the proposition that La Salle and Tonty make no mention of such a fort have been noted. In a letter written from the Chicago Portage, June 4, 1683, La Salle[93] speaks of a "fort" here, built by two of his men the preceding winter. This structure Mason describes as a "little stockade with a log house within its enclosure,"[94] and declares it to have been the first known structure of anything like a permanent character at Chicago. But a log hut constructed by two men and never garrisoned by any regular force hardly merits the designation of a fort in the ordinary acceptation of this term, even though it was surrounded by a stockade. Those who speak of a French fort at Chicago in this period refer not to this structure but to the "Fort of Chicagou" commanded by M. de la Durantaye in the winter of 1685-86.

[93] Margry, II, 317.

[94] Mason, Chapters from Illinois History, 144.

Our information concerning this fort is very scanty, being confined to a simple mention of it with the name of its commander, in Tonty's memoir of 1693.[95] At the end of October, 1685, Tonty started from Mackinac in a canoe on Lake Michigan to go to Fort St. Louis on the Illinois River. Because of the lateness of the season his progress was rendered impossible by the formation of ice in the lake. This compelled him to return to Mackinac, whence he again set forth, this time by land, for Fort St. Louis. An earlier account of this trip than that of 1693, but of equal brevity, was written by Tonty in the summer of 1686.[96] It does not even mention Durantaye's "Fort of Chicagou," but it adds certain details concerning Tonty's trip which are of importance in determining the location of that establishment.

[95] French, Historical Collections of Louisiana, I, 67.

[96] Letter of Tonty to M. Cabart de Villermont, August 24, 1686, in Margry, III, 560.

Tonty was, of course, familiar by 1686 with both sides of Lake Michigan. In view of this fact it is extremely improbable that, having to go by land from Mackinac to Fort St. Louis in the winter time, he would make the long détour around the head of Lake Michigan and Green Bay and down the western side of the lake, rather than follow the shorter route down the eastern side and around its southern end. This reasoning finds support in the statements of Tonty of the distances he traversed. The entire distance from Mackinac to Fort St. Louis he gives as two hundred leagues, and states that after traveling one hundred and twenty leagues he came to Durantaye's fort. It was, therefore, eighty leagues from Fort St. Louis. The usual estimate of French travelers of this time of the distance between Chicago and Fort St. Louis was thirty leagues;[97] while the distance overland from St. Joseph to Fort St. Louis was approximately eighty leagues. It is incredible that Tonty would estimate the distance from Mackinac to Chicago by land at one hundred and twenty leagues, and that from Chicago to Fort St. Louis at eighty leagues, a distance two-thirds as great. The supposition that Durantaye's fort was on the St. Joseph River rather than the modern Chicago harmonizes well both with the probabilities of the case and the distances given us by Tonty.

[97] See for example St. Cosme's statement in Shea, Early Voyages Up and Down the Mississippi, 59.

The foregoing reasoning is not, of course, absolutely conclusive of the location of Durantaye's "Fort of Chicagou," It is strengthened, however, by one other consideration. If such a fort was in fact here in January, 1686, what had happened to it in the interval between this time and Cavalier La Salle's visit in the autumn of 1687? Joutel's narrative of the adventures of his party is given with a wealth of detail. Both in the autumn of 1687 and again in the spring of 1688 the traveler stayed at Chicago for several days. Not only does the narrative show that there was no garrison or fort here, but it contains no mention of such an establishment at any previous time.

The French had no fort at Chicago in the eighteenth century, then, and if they had one in the seventeenth century it could only have been a temporary, structure which quickly disappeared. It remains to suggest an explanation of the origin of the widespread belief that there was a French fort at Chicago. It seems evident that it was due largely to the cartographers, who, residing for the most part in Europe, found themselves at a loss to interpret correctly the narratives of the explorers, which were themselves oftentimes confused and inaccurate, or lacking in detail. That the cartographers often labored in the dark, and that their work was frequently erroneous, will be apparent from a comparison of their maps with those of an authoritative modern atlas. The representations of the map-makers can no more be relied upon implicitly than can the narratives of the time; and there is as much reason in the one case as in the other for subjecting them to critical scrutiny.

In the present instance the erroneous belief in the existence of a French fort at Chicago in the eighteenth century probably originated with Father Hennepin, the garrulous companion of La Salle. He had been at La Salle's Fort Miami on the St. Joseph, and had passed thence with his leader down the Kankakee and the Illinois. Yet his New Discovery, first published in 1697, contains a map[98] showing "Fort des Miamis" at the mouth of a stream emptying into the southwestern corner of Lake Michigan. It is obvious from a comparison of this map with the one in Hennepin's earlier work, the Description of Louisiana, published in 1683,[99] that this representation is intended for the St. Joseph River and La Salle's Fort Miami, which, by a stupid blunder, have been transferred from the southeastern to the southwestern side of the lake. The New Discovery enjoyed widespread popularity, and numerous editions were issued during the following years, not only in French but also in foreign languages. Hennepin's maps, too, were widely copied in other works, and so the blunder with respect to the location of Fort Miami was perpetuated. Evidently this was the source of the error of Logan and of the many who in later times repeated his statements. Ignorant alike of the fact that Fort Miami had stood at the mouth of the St. Joseph and that it had been destroyed nearly forty years before, Logan located it at Chicago in 1718, adding the interesting information that it "was not regularly garrisoned."

[98] For a reproduction of this map see Winsor, Narrative and Critical History, IV, 251; Hennepin, New Discovery (Thwaites ed.), I, (facing) 22.

[99] For a reproduction of this map see Winsor, op. cit., IV, 249; Hennepin, op. cit., I, frontispiece.

CHAPTER III
THE FOX WARS: A HALF-CENTURY OF CONFLICT

With the dawn of the eighteenth century the character of the annals of Chicago undergoes a radical change. The period which had just closed had been marked by great activity on the part of the French in the adjoining region. For a quarter of a century the Illinois River had constituted their chief highway from the Great Lakes to the Mississippi. Upon its placid bosom trader, priest, and warrior alike had plied their bark canoes. For the time being the Illinois realized La Salle's design for it of furnishing the connecting link between the two great river systems of New France. The Chicago River and Portage thus became an important feature in the geography of New France, although it shared with the Kankakee the sum total of travel by the Illinois River route.

But already forces were at work which were to effect a complete readjustment of the Indian map of Illinois and Wisconsin, to shift the center of French influence in this region from northern Illinois to its lower Mississippi border, and to furnish one of the interesting although much-neglected chapters in the history of the long struggle between France and England for the supremacy of the continent. An adequate understanding of the character and operation of these influences necessitates a brief review of the circumstances of their origin.

In the year after the founding of Quebec, Champlain, the "Father of New France," engaged in an enterprise which proved to be fraught with far-reaching consequences for his countrymen. To gain the favor of the dusky neighbors of the infant colony he accompanied an Algonquin war party on a foray against their ancient foes, the Iroquois.[100] The latter had never seen a firearm, and their warriors fled in terror before the death-dealing device of the white man. The Algonquins gained a temporary triumph, and Champlain gave his name to the beautiful lake which still bears it. But of greater moment was it that New France, almost at its birth, gained the undying enmity of the Iroquois.

[100] For this expedition and its results see Winsor, Narrative and Critical History, IV, 117-21; 167-68.

Before the death of Champlain, and largely due to his zeal, the French had extended their explorations and trading-houses to the Great Lakes. In 1634 Nicolet passed through the Straits of Mackinac to Lake Michigan, traversed Green Bay, and revealed to his countrymen the region now known as Wisconsin. But now ensued a lull in the exploring activities of the French, and soon they were led to abandon their trading-posts on the lakes. The Iroquois had succeeded in establishing friendly relations with the Dutch along the Hudson, and by them were provided with guns and ammunition.[101] Thus armed they turned upon their enemies. The French had at first refrained from supplying their red allies with guns, and these now fell an easy prey to the combination of Iroquois courage and Dutch guns. In the ensuing years the Hurons were ruined, the Fries were exterminated, the region to the west, between the Ohio and the Great Lakes, was turned into a desert, and life was made a burden to the French of Canada.

[101] Winsor, op. cit., chap, v; Turner, "Character and Influence of the Indian Trade in Wisconsin," 14.

The expansion of New France was shortly resumed, but the hostility of the Iroquois operated powerfully to determine its course. By their victories the Iroquois secured possession of the upper St. Lawrence and of Lakes Erie and Ontario. The French were thus prevented from expanding southward. Their natural entrance to the Great Lakes by way of the upper St. Lawrence was closed, and they were forced to seek the upper lakes by the Ottawa River route to Georgian Bay. The alliance with the Algonquins, begun by Champlain, became general, and the French control over these tribes in the Great Lakes region was firmly established. The fur trade of the great interior thus became the chief financial support of Canada. On the other hand the English succeeded to the Dutch trade and friendship with the Iroquois, and, working through them as middlemen, competed actively with the French for the trade of the Northwest.

The effect of this combination on the execution of La Salle's designs has already been seen. The desire of the English to share in the fur trade of the Northwest furnished the principal motive for fomenting the wars between the French and the Iroquois.[102] Protection of his Indian allies against the Iroquois war parties was one of the conditions essential to the maintenance of La Salle's Illinois colony. The active competition of the English for the fur trade of the interior shortly produced another result. Before the advent of the white man in America the Indian had been economically self-sustaining.[103] Contact with civilization speedily developed in him new wants and tastes without developing the corresponding ability to satisfy them. In the fur-bearing animals of his country, however, he possessed a source of wealth greatly prized by the European peoples. Hence the basis of the barter which constituted the Indian trade. In this barter the red man should have occupied a position of equality with the white, since each possessed articles valuable in the eyes of the other. But, as always in bargaining, where the parties are unequally matched, the Indian, less intelligent and less shrewd than the white man, and dependent on the supplies of the latter for his very existence, got the worst of it. As long as the French monopolized the trade of the Northwest, so long was their control over the Indians absolute. The entrance of the English into competition for this trade, by giving the Indian another market for his furs and another source of supply of the goods needed, tended to free him from this control.

[102] Turner, "Character and Influence of the Fur Trade in Wisconsin," in Wisconsin State Historical Society Proceedings for 1889, 69.

[103] American State Papers, Indian Affairs, II, 181, 261; Turner, Indian Trade in Wisconsin, 32, 68.

About the time of La Salle's death the Fox Indians of Wisconsin became disgruntled over the system of trade carried on by the French, and in particular over the attempt of the latter to establish commercial relations with the Sioux, their ancient enemy to the westward.[104] By means of their strategic position, both geographically with reference to the Fox-Wisconsin waterway which they controlled, and with respect to their relations with the various tribes to east and west, they found it possible to deal with the French on somewhat even terms. In 1687 they threatened to pillage the post at Green Bay, and before the end of the century they had effectually closed the Fox-Wisconsin highway to the Mississippi to French travel. St. Cosme's party which visited Chicago in 1698 desired to follow this route, which would have been both easier and shorter. They were forced to take the "Chicago road," however, because the Foxes would permit no one to pass the northern route for fear they would go to their enemies.[105]

[104] Turner, op. cit. There were two reasons for their opposition to this trade. By supplying the Sioux with firearms and goods the French enabled them to carry on their contest with the Foxes on even terms. Furthermore the Foxes desired to play the role of middlemen in the trade between the French and the Indians farther west. As early as 1675, according to Marquette (Jesuit Relations, LIX, 174), the Illinois Indians were trading in this way between the French and their own people, and already were acting "like the traders" and giving them hardly more for their furs than did the French themselves.

[105] Shea, Early Voyages Up and Down the Mississippi, 49.

The story of the wars thus opened presents a dreary succession of cruel deeds and bloody scenes, broken by intervals of inactivity, lasting for half a century.[106] The Foxes guarded with grim tenacity the Fox-Wisconsin highway; they seemed determined to block every avenue by which the French might reach the Sioux, and for many years no one might pass between Canada and Louisiana except at imminent risk of his life. In part owing to ancient relationship, in part because of the logic of the situation, the Foxes entered into friendly relations with the Iroquois and were in turn encouraged by them in their contest with the French. For a like reason they made war upon the Illinois, the faithful allies of the French, raiding their territory again and again, sometimes even to the walls of Fort Chartres, the great French stronghold of the upper Mississippi Valley. The Foxes were fewer but no less courageous than the terrible Iroquois, and the role they now played in the West was curiously similar to that so long enacted on a larger scale by the Iroquois toward the French. Their opposition became so intolerable to the French that repeated attempts were made to exterminate them. The Foxes were terribly punished, and for a long time their power seemed fairly broken, the survivors being driven to abandon their homes in Wisconsin and seek refuge beyond the Mississippi. But they were not exterminated, and the French were at last compelled to give up the attempt. The dominion of France in the Northwest was itself drawing to a close; and to its downfall the long struggle with the Foxes, with its consequent drain upon the treasury of Canada and the disaffection for the French engendered by it among the northwestern tribes, materially contributed.

[106] For a brief summary of the Fox wars and their results see Turner, Indian Trade in Wisconsin, 34-39. Fuller and more important accounts are given by Parkman, A Half Century of Conflict, and Hebberd, Wisconsin under the Dominion of France. The latter takes issue with Parkman in certain important respects. A large number of the original documents pertaining to the subject are printed in O'Callaghan, New York Colonial Documents, Vols. IX, X, and in Wisconsin Historical Collections, Vols. XVI, XVII.

The first great event in the fifty-year contest occurred at Detroit in 1712. Before this post there appeared in the early summer of that year a band of a thousand Outagamies or Foxes, three hundred of them warriors, the remainder women and children. Of the siege, and the destruction of the Foxes at the hands of the French and their red allies, which ensued, two accounts differing widely from each other have come down to us.[107] The official report of Dubuisson, the French commandant at Detroit, represents that the Foxes came with hostile intent, which was manifested in their conduct from the moment of their arrival. This report has been accepted by Parkman, whose account of the siege is in effect a paraphrase of it.[108] Yet in many respects its reliability is open to question. The very fact that the Fox warriors came incumbered with seven hundred women and children suffices to show that they were not engaged in a hostile expedition. The other contemporary account of the affair, by DeLery, asserts it was due to a plot on the part of the French, designed to lure the obnoxious tribe to its destruction.[109] This account differs from Dubuisson's report in other respects as well; among other things DeLery represents that the Foxes evacuated their fort on the eighth day of the siege, while Dubuisson states that this occurred on the nineteenth day. It seems impossible at this day, in view of our limited information, to decide between the two conflicting versions. Concerning the main facts of the destruction of the Foxes, however, the two accounts agree fairly well; since Dubuisson's is that of an eye-witness who was at the same time the commander of the French, and moreover since it is much more detailed than DeLery's account, the following narrative of the siege is based upon it.

[107] For the documents see Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 267 ff.

[108] Parkman, Half Century of Conflict, chap. xii.

[109] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 293-95.

The Foxes constructed a fort within fifty paces of the French post and began to conduct themselves with great insolence. Since Dubuisson's allies were absent upon their hunting expedition, he felt compelled to submit to their indignities, until a party sought to kill two of the French within the fort itself. Then the commandant interfered and cleared the fort, but he was still compelled to temporize until the arrival of the Ottawa and other bands for whom he had hastily sent.

Six hundred of the allied warriors shortly arrived, burning with zeal for the destruction of the hated Foxes, whose warfare had been directed in turn against all the northwestern tribes except the Sacs, Kickapoos, and Mascoutens, their allies.[110] The French distributed arms and ammunition to the warriors and the contest was promptly joined. Their war cries "made the earth tremble," but evidently the Foxes were not similarly affected, for they replied in kind less than a pistol shot away, and the firing began. The Foxes were badly outnumbered and in sore straits for food and water, but their ancient reputation for bravery was not belied. The French erected towers from which they fired down into the hostile camp, driving the Foxes to seek refuge in holes in the ground. In this fashion the siege was pressed for nineteen days, with alternations of hope and despair on the part of the contestants.

[110] The story of an affair which occurred in the vicinity of Chicago affords a concrete illustration of the misdeeds by which these tribes incurred the enmity of their neighbors. Three Miami squaws who had been captured by the Iroquois had effected their escape in consequence of the defeat administered to the Senecas by Denonville's expedition in 1687. Returning to their homes, the squaws encountered at the River "Chikagou" some Mascoutens, who shortly before had assassinated two Frenchmen. The fear that the women would reveal this affair led the assassins to "break their heads." To add insult to injury they carried away the scalps of the women and gave them to the Miamis to eat, saying that they were scalps of the Iroquois. For thus causing the Miamis to eat their own flesh the Great Spirit afflicted the Mascoutens with a malady which caused them and their children to die. Not satisfied with this divine vengeance, however, a party of Miamis came to Perrot in 1690 to tell him their story and obtain his assistance in a war against the Mascoutens. The French were still engrossed in their struggle with the Iroquois, however, and the Miamis were compelled to nurse their vengeance until a more opportune time (Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 145-46).

At one time the Foxes, perishing from thirst, adopted a ruse which smacks of the Homeric age. Covering their ramparts with scarlet blankets and erecting twelve red standards to attract attention, they addressed their opponents with taunting speeches. The great war chief of the Pottawatomies mounted one of the towers and began an eloquent reply, in which the character of the English, who were regarded as the sponsors of the Foxes, was severely handled. Meanwhile under cover of this oratorical contest the Foxes had crept out to secure a supply of water; seeing which, Dubuisson cut short the speech with an order to recommence firing and the chieftain's further opinion of the English was forever lost to the world.

The Foxes soon made overtures to surrender, but the red foe was implacable for their destruction and the French commander, reflecting that they had been set on by the English to destroy him, and that "war and pity do not well agree together," abandoned them to their fate. Taking advantage of a stormy night the survivors made their escape and fled. Dubuisson spurred on the pursuit, however, and they were brought to bay a few miles away. A second siege ensued, terminating four days later in an abject surrender. No quarter was granted to the vanquished warriors; all but a hundred were killed, and these were tied, being reserved, evidently, for future torture. This pleasure was denied the victors, however, for all succeeded in making their escape. The conquerors returned to the fort with the enslaved women and children, where "their amusement was" to shoot four or five each day. The Hurons spared not a single one of their captives. "In this manner," concludes Dubuisson, "came to an end, Sir, these two wicked nations, who so badly afflicted and troubled all the country. Our Rev. Father chaunted a grand mass to render thanks to God for having preserved us from the enemy."

But this pious thanksgiving proved premature. The Foxes had suffered a great disaster, but only a portion of the tribe had been involved in it, and of this portion one-third of the warriors had escaped. The immediate result was that they turned on their foes with redoubled fury. Father Marest, writing only a week after Dubuisson's report was made, points out that, with their allies, the Foxes still number five hundred warriors. The French in this region will always have cause to fear an attack and travelers will always be in danger; "for the Foxes, Kickapoos, and Mascoutens are found everywhere, and they are a people without pity and without reason."[111]

The good Father's fears were amply justified. DeLery tells us that as soon as the Mascoutens and Kickapoos of the larger villages heard of the destruction of their allies, they sent out war parties to Green Bay, Detroit, and to all the routes of travel. Their Indian foes fled in terror before them, and this went on until Louvigny brought about peace four years later.[112] These are the statements of an enemy of Dubuisson, but they are amply corroborated by official sources.[113] So great was the fear of the Foxes on the part of the other tribes that they preferred death from starvation in their cabins to the risk of meeting them on their hunting expeditions. It was this interference with the prosecution of the fur trade that chiefly excited the anger of the French. Ramezay, the acting governor of Canada, observes in a letter of September, 1714, that the merchants will this year have a gloomy confirmation of these conditions, seeing how little peltry has come down to Mackinac.

[111] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 289.

[112] Ibid., 293-95.

[113] See letters of Ramezay and Veudreuil, ibid., 300-307.

In this same year the Foxes fell upon the Illinois and killed or carried off seventy-seven of them.[114] Veudreuil, the governor, had decided the preceding year that the Foxes must be destroyed and had intrusted the task to Louvigny, the former commander at Mackinac.[115] It was planned to establish peace between the Miamis and the Illinois, who were enemies in common of the Foxes, and then to lead all the northwestern tribes friendly to the French against the Foxes and their allies.[116] This project failed of execution, however, owing to the illness of Louvigny.[117] De Lignery was therefore substituted as the leader, and a more elaborate campaign was devised. The Miamis, Ouiatanons, Illinois, and Detroit Indians were to rendezvous at Chicago under French leadership in the summer of 1715, while the coureurs de bois, the Ottawas, and the other northern tribes were to be gathered at Mackinac under De Lignery. The departure of the forces from these places was to be so timed that both would arrive at the Fox fort at the end of August. The detachment which arrived first was to invest the fort and then await the arrival of the second corps before attempting its reduction. To complete the plan, agents had been sent to the Sioux to urge them not only to refuse the Foxes an asylum, but to join the French in making war upon them.

[114] Parkman, Half Century of Conflict, chap. xiv.

[115] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 298.

[116] Ibid., 303-7; 319-20.

[117] Ibid., 312-14.

The campaign thus elaborately projected utterly miscarried, but its story deserves a place in the history of early Chicago, none the less. The choice of Chicago as the place of rendezvous of the southern tribes was due, aside from the obvious convenience of its location, to the game of all sorts which abounded here, on which the savages could easily subsist while awaiting the arrival of the Detroit contingent.[118] An epidemic of measles assailed the Ouiatanons, and the fickle savages promptly charged the deaths which resulted to the French, who had come to lead them to the place of rendezvous.[119] They were cajoled into promising, however, that such as were able would go to Chicago, and a half-dozen Frenchmen were left among them to insure their arrival by the tenth of August. The remainder of the French went on to rouse the Illinois and lead them to the meeting-place.

[118] Ibid., 319.

[119] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 322-25.

Meanwhile the measles continued to afflict the Ouiatanons, the death rate mounting to fifteen or twenty a day. Instead of the two hundred warriors that had been promised, the little band of Frenchmen were forced to depart on the overland march to Chicago with only one-tenth as many.[120] Their food supply was scanty, and the savages were restrained from hunting along the way by their fear of the Foxes, whose war trails leading toward Detroit were encountered. When they reached Chicago they found the Illinois and Detroit savages had not yet arrived; nor were there any signs of the canoes which were to have come from Mackinac to inform them regarding the march against the Foxes from that point. To add to their troubles two of their party were attacked by the measles, whereupon the whole band of Indians deserted the Frenchmen and returned to their homes. The latter, after waiting four or five days beyond the time set for the arrival of their comrades with the Illinois contingent, set out to meet them. In this they failed because of their ignorance of the route, and the little party found rest for the time being with the Indians at Starved Rock.

[120] Ibid.

Meanwhile, what had happened to the Illinois Indians ? The Frenchmen who had gone from the Ouiatanons to rouse the Illinois received a royal welcome from the Indians of the Rock, and, collecting their warriors, led a band of four hundred and fifty to Chicago, which was reached on the seventeenth of August. The leader was much mortified to find no one there and to get no news from Mackinac. To divert the savages and if possible to obtain news, scouts were sent out to a distance of thirty leagues. Their efforts were fruitless, however. On their return ten days later without any tidings, the Indians could be restrained no longer. They dispersed and the Frenchmen returned to Starved Rock, where they found their countrymen whom they had left among the Ouiatanons.

One further act remains to complete this series of misfortunes. The coureurs de bois assembled at Mackinac, but the failure of the supplies which were expected from Montreal to arrive led to the abandonment of the northern end of the expedition.[121] This explains the non-arrival of the canoes at Chicago, which had so disappointed the Ouiatanon and Illinois detachments. In ignorance of these various miscarriages the Detroit contingent arrived. From Chicago they proceeded to the Illinois village at the Rock, expecting to find there the French leaders of the enterprise.[122] They, however, were now at Kaskaskia, overcome with illness. They could only send a messenger to urge the Illinois to join the Hurons and others who composed the expedition in a foray against the Mascoutens and Kickapoos, allies of the Foxes, who were hunting "along a certain river." This was done, and in November the combined bands, accompanied by only two Frenchmen, fell upon the Mascoutens. The report of what followed must be taken with the usual allowance for statements which have an Indian origin.[123] According to their story they attacked the Mascoutens, who were stationed on a rock, and after a sharp battle forced their position, killing one hundred warriors and taking forty-seven prisoners, without counting the women and children. To conceal the route of their retreat the party went down the river in canoes a distance of twenty-five leagues. In spite of this precaution they were overtaken on the eleventh day by four hundred men, "the elite of the Reynards." Though they numbered but eighty, and were incumbered by the prisoners and wounded, they asserted that in a battle lasting from dawn till three o'clock in the afternoon they defeated the Foxes with great loss and pursued them for several hours.

[121] Ibid., 339.

[122] Ibid., 341. That they came to Chicago is not directly stated, but I consider this a fair inference from this and the preceding documents.

[123] It is true there were two Frenchmen with the party, as already stated. But these had a direct interest in permitting the Indian reports to go uncorrected; one of them was, in fact, promoted for his participation in this expedition, and the other was an outlawed bushranger among the Illinois, whose "reprobate life" had been the subject of an indignant letter from the governor to the French ministry only the year before (Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 302-3). Now, apparently, a virtue was made of necessity, and he was urged to use his influence over the Illinois to induce them to join the Hurons in the proposed expedition.

In the following year, 1716, the delayed project against the Foxes was executed. Louvigny was again intrusted with the command.[124] He left Montreal the first of May with two hundred and twenty-five Frenchmen, and two hundred more were to join him at Mackinac.[125] While en route they were joined by about four hundred Indian allies, and the whole party proceeded by way of Mackinac and Green Bay to the country of the Foxes. The latter had gathered to the number of five hundred warriors and three thousand women and children in a fort protected by three rows of oaken palisades and a ditch, located on the Fox River some distance from Green Bay. This Louvigny besieged in regular European fashion, with trenches and mining operations. The Foxes fought with spirit, although, according to Charlevoix, both besiegers and besieged believed them to be on the brink of destruction. At the end of three days, however, a surrender was arranged, terms were granted the besieged, and the invading army marched away.

[124] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 328-30.

[125] Ibid., 342. For secondary accounts of this expedition see Hebberd, Wisconsin under the Dominion of France, 94 ff.; Charlevoix, History of New France (Shea transl.), V, 305 ff.

The reason for this surprising outcome of the great expedition remains a matter of doubt to the present day. Louvigny asserted that the terms he imposed were so harsh that no one believed the Foxes would accede to them; and further, that his allies approved of the arrangement made.[126] The first of these statements is not worthy of serious attention, and the last the French Indians themselves indignantly denied.[127] The Fox chieftain, Ouashala, later asserted that they could easily have escaped by means of a sortie by night, and that this had already been resolved upon. Possibly the real truth is that Louvigny was hampered by his instructions and that he feared to press the Foxes to the last extremity. It may be also that the reported approach of three hundred allies of the Foxes influenced his decision. Whatever the reason, the results from the expedition were meager. The Foxes did not fulfil the terms of their agreement with Louvigny, and although they refrained from making war on the French Indians for a time, the situation in the Northwest continued to be as intolerable to the French as ever.

[126] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 343.

[127] Charlevoix, History of New France, V, 306.

The lull which followed Louvigny's expedition was soon broken, and the restless feuds between the Illinois and the Foxes and their allies were renewed. In 1719 the Foxes were again at war with the Illinois, who seem this time to have been the aggressors.[128] When Charlevoix passed down the Kankakee and Illinois rivers in 1721, he devoted a considerable portion of his journal to a description of the dangers encountered along the way.[129] At Starved Rock he was filled with horror at the spectacle of the remains of two prisoners who had been burned recently. At Lake Peoria he was informed by some Canadians that his party was in the midst of four Fox war parties. A band of Illinois had recently encountered one of them, and each party had taken a prisoner. Here as at Starved Rock the priest was horrified by the spectacle of the wretch whom the Illinois had tortured to death. Notwithstanding Charlevoix's sturdy escort, commanded by the gallant St. Ange,[130] it was considered dangerous for the party to proceed. It was strengthened somewhat and the resolution was formed to press on, but the horrors he had seen and heard so affected the good Father that for a week he was unable to sleep soundly.

[128] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVIII, 381, 429, 445, 447.

[129] Charlevoix, Histoire ... de la Nouvelle France, VI, letters of September 17 and October 5, 1721.

[130] For an account of St. Ange's career in Illinois see Mason, "Illinois in the Eighteenth Century," in Chapters from Illinois History.

The Illinois now captured and burned the nephew of Ouashala, the principal war chief of the Foxes. The latter avenged this by laying siege the next year to the Illinois stronghold of Starved Rock. They starved the defenders into a surrender, and then, to placate the French, spared their lives.[131] Returning to their own territory the leaders hastened to Green Bay to justify to the French commandant their action in going to war. Montigny blustered and assured them that whenever Onontio[132] wished it they should "indeed die and perish without resource." To the French minister, however, Veudreuil admitted, in a report of the following year, that the Illinois directly, and indirectly the French, through their neglect to secure justice to the Foxes, were responsible for the hostilities.[133] It is evident from the reports of the French themselves that the Foxes were frequently treated unjustly by the French and their Indian allies, and that in spite of this and their natural ferocity, they at times displayed admirable patience in enduring the impositions heaped upon them.

[131] For the original documents pertaining to this affair see Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 418-22, 428-31.

[132] The Indian designation for the French Governor. It was later applied also to the French King.

[133] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 429-30. An inaccurate description of the affray at Starved Rock is given by Charlevoix (History of New France, VI, 71). He states that the Illinois beat off the Foxes with a loss of one hundred and twenty men, having themselves lost only twenty. He adds that the attack determined the Illinois to abandon the Rock and Lake Peoria, and join their kinsmen who had already sought refuge at Fort Chartres. No check whatever now existed to the raids of the Foxes along the Illinois River, and communication between Canada and Louisiana by this route became more impracticable than ever. It is plain, however, in spite of Charlevoix's statements, that there were Illinois at the Rock during the following years. For references to them between 1730 and 1736 see Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVII, no, 183, 251. At the latter date the Illinois village numbered fifty warriors.

For several years following 1725 divided counsels prevailed among the French with respect to the policy to be pursued toward the Foxes.[134] Some argued that they should be destroyed. Others agreed as to the desirability of this, but, dubious as to its practicability, counseled a policy of conciliation. The French king first ordered their destruction, and then that they be let alone. A fitful peace was patched up for a time, but the receipt of information that the Foxes had promised English emissaries to kill all the French decided the latter to make war in earnest.[135]

[134] See Parkman, Half Century of Conflict, chap. xiv. For the original documents see Wisconsin Historical Collections, Vol. XVI.

[135] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVI, 476-77.

The Foxes resisted desperately the attempt to exterminate them.[136] De Lignery led an expedition from Montreal in 1728, which on its arrival in Wisconsin numbered five hundred Frenchmen and over a thousand Indians. To this invasion of her future sister state Illinois contributed a force of twenty Frenchmen and five hundred Indians, who came by way of the Chicago Portage. The results of this great effort, however, were but slight. The Foxes abandoned their villages and retired before the French, who succeeded in capturing two squaws and an old man. The former were enslaved and the latter was roasted at a slow fire, to the scandal of Father Crespel, who expressed his surprise to the tormentors at the pleasure they derived from the performance.

[136] For the facts about the ensuing period see Wisconsin Historical Collections, Vol. XVII, editorial introduction and accompanying documents. Father Crespel's report of De Lignery's expedition is printed in Smith, History of Wisconsin, I, 339 ff.

Having burned the villages and ravaged the cornfields De Lignery retired, confessing his failure and placing the responsibility for it on the Illinois contingent, who should have come by way of the Wisconsin Portage instead of by Chicago, and thus have taken the Foxes in the rear. The forts upon Lake Pepin and Green Bay were evacuated, and Wisconsin was temporarily abandoned to the red man. The only recourse now before the French was to rouse against the Foxes the neighboring tribes, who by constantly harassing them might gradually wear them down.[137] This policy proved effective, and in 1729 the Foxes sued for peace. It was not granted, however, and meanwhile a chain of circumstances arising from De Lignery's humiliation of 1728 was weaving for them a disaster more terrible than that which had befallen them at Detroit in 1712.

[137] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVIII, xiii.

When the French evacuated Fort Beauharnois[138] on Lake Pepin in 1728, they attempted to escape down the Mississippi to Fort Chartres, but were taken captive by the Kickapoos and Mascoutens, hitherto the allies of the Foxes, who had settled in eastern Iowa.[139] During the long captivity that ensued Father Guignas, one of the prisoners, succeeded in inducing their captors to desert the Foxes and sue for peace with the French.[140] Weakened by this defection the Foxes sought, by passing around the southern end of Lake Michigan and through the country of the Ouiatanons, who were well disposed toward them, to escape to the Iroquois.[141] The Kickapoos and Mascoutens reported this design to the nearest French posts, but, doubting the fidelity of their new allies, the settlers around Fort Chartres for a time declined to take the field.

[138] Named for Charles Beauharnois, governor of New France from 1726 to 1747. He was reputed to be the natural son of Louis XIV, and it has sometimes been said, though apparently incorrectly, that the Empress Josephine was descended from him.

[139] Narrative of De Boucherville, Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVII, 36 ff.

[140] Ibid., 36 ff., 110.

[141] For the documents pertaining to this affair see Wisconsin Historical Collections, V, 106-7; and XVII, 100-101, 109-30.

Confirmation shortly arrived in the shape of information that the Foxes had captured some of the Illinois near Starved Rock and had burned the son of the great chief of the Cahokias. On this St. Ange, the commandant of Fort Chartres, conducted an expedition against them. Parties of French and of savages gathered from all directions. From Fort St. Joseph came De Villiers and his son, the latter a mere youth, destined, a quarter of a century later at Fort Necessity, to defeat and capture the youthful George Washington.

In all some twelve or thirteen hundred French and Indians surrounded the doomed Foxes. The latter had intrenched themselves in a grove on the bank of a small river, some distance to the southeast of Starved Rock.[142] Under the direction of the elder De Villiers the siege was pressed with vigor. Both forces suffered from lack of food, but the necessity of the Foxes was naturally the greater. On the twenty-third day of the siege, under cover of a cold and stormy night they attempted to make their escape. Their design was revealed by the crying of the children and the besiegers promptly pursued them. As soon as daylight made it possible to distinguish friend from foe an indiscriminate slaughter began. The Fox warriors, weakened by hunger and long exertion and surrounded by overwhelming numbers, maintained their courage to the end. The women and children and old men walked in front, and the warriors stationed themselves in the rear between them and the enemy. But their line was speedily broken. Two hundred of the warriors were killed, besides an equal number of women and children. Some four or five hundred of the latter were taken prisoners and scattered as slaves among the various tribes. A few of the warriors, by throwing away their arms and ammunition, succeeded in escaping, but in such a plight that their fate was little preferable to that of the slain.

[142] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVII, in, 115, 129. J. F. Steward (Lost Maramech and Earliest Chicago) locates this fort on the Fox River, in Kendall County, Illinois. This does not harmonize, however, with Hocquart's letter to the French minister, January 15, 1731, describing the place and the destruction of the Foxes.

The triumph of the French over the foe that had defied them for a generation was, apparently, complete. Even their Indian allies had been moved to pity by the plight of the Foxes, but no humane sentiment animated the subjects of the Most Christian King.[143] The extirpation of the hated race was decreed, and the savage allies were spurred on to the work of destruction. By drawing in the slaves from the nations to which they had been distributed,[144] the surviving Foxes managed to assemble a village of forty-five cabins the year after their overthrow at the hands of De Villiers. The Hurons of Detroit, ancient enemies of the Foxes, assumed the task of destroying this remnant of the tribe, and sent an invitation to the band of Christian Iroquois at the Lake of the Two Mountains to join them in the work. They accepted, and in the autumn of 1731 a band of forty-seven appeared at Detroit where they were joined by seventy-four Hurons and four Ottawas and the whole set out for Wisconsin.[145]

[143] Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVII, xiv, 167-69.

[144] The Illinois furnished an exception; their captives had all been put to death (ibid., 163).

They followed the Indian trail to the mouth of the St. Joseph River and thence around the southern end of Lake Michigan to the Chicago Portage, where they built a fort and left in it some sick men with a guard to protect them. Some chiefs of the St. Joseph Pottawatomies came to them while here and promised if they would defer their expedition until spring they would join them. They declined to assent to this, and pushed on westward to the village of the Mascoutens and Kickapoos located on Rock River. According to the boastful report of the Indians, made on their return from the expedition, these were asked to join them but refused in terror. They were persuaded, however, to furnish guides to conduct the party to their former allies, but these prudently turned back before the village of the Foxes was reached.

[145] Parkman (Half Century of Conflict, chap, xiv) tells the story of the expedition. For the original documents pertaining to it see Wisconsin Historical Collections, XVII, 148-69.

Winter had now arrived and the party was suffering from hunger and the fatigue caused by the deep snow. A council was held and the old men favored turning back. The young men declined to accede to this, however, and so the party divided. The old men returned to Chicago, while the others to the number of forty Hurons and thirty Iroquois pushed on toward the Wisconsin, where they expected to find their quarry. After several days they came upon the Foxes, who promptly took to flight. For the story of what followed we have only the report of the victors, which is manifestly unreliable. It is repeated, therefore, rather as furnishing a typical illustration of an Indian report of such an encounter than because of faith in the trustworthiness of its details.